Kochamma and others v The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J.
Judgment Date: 2022-02-18
Court Decision / Holding: The appeal is disposed of with the following: the petitioners are entitled to an enhanced amount of Rs. 2,07,500 over the Tribunal’s award, to be deposited by the insurer before the Tribunal with 9% interest from the date of petition till realization, along with proportionate costs, within two months from receipt of the copy of this judgment. Interest shall be calculated excluding a period of 700 days as per order dated 18-01-2022 in C.M. Application No. 1/2016. The overall outcome increases the compensation payable to the appellants beyond the Tribunal’s figure.
Final Disposition: Appeal partly allowed; enhanced compensation awarded; directions for deposit with interest and costs issued; matter disposed of accordingly.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

KOCHAMMA
SUMA
TARA
V.K. SUNIL MENON

Respondents

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Jacob Sebastian (Adv)

Counsels for Respondents

• Lal K. Joseph (Adv)

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Motor Accident Claims Appeal (MACA No. 390 of 2016) from Palakkad challenging the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in O.P. (MV) No. 983/2010 for the death of K.P. Vijayan in a 2009 accident. The appellants—KOCHAMMA, SUMA, TARA, and V.K. SUNIL MENON—alleged the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 3,51,000 as total compensation under various heads was patently inadequate and failed to consider several heads of loss (bystander expenses, transportation to hospital, damage to clothing, and proper calculation under loss of dependency). The insurer, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., admitted the policy but contended the claim was excessive; the owner and driver were made parties. The Tribunal found negligence on the part of the driver and used a notional income for the deceased, applying a multiplier of 7 given his age (64). The High Court, citing Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., rejected the lower notional income and recalculated the damages, increasing the dependency component and approving additional heads. The result is an enhanced overall compensation with directions to deposit the enhanced amount with interest and costs, within two months. The appeal thus leads to partial relief for the appellants, with better compensation than awarded by the Tribunal.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellants argued that the Tribunal erred in not awarding certain heads of compensation and undercompensated for the loss of dependency. They contended that the deceased, who was hospitalized for 51 days, required additional bystander's expenses, transportation to hospital, and a more realistic notional income. They urged adopting Rs. 7,000 as monthly income (based on the Supreme Court authority in Ramachandrappa) and applying an appropriate multiplier for a 64-year-old, resulting in higher dependency compensation. They also pointed out the lack of awards under several heads and sought an overall enhanced compensation (ultimately calculating a total enhanced relief of Rs. 2,07,500 over the Tribunal’s award).

Contentions of Respondents

The insurer contended that the claim was excessive and exorbitant; the policy was admitted but the total compensation claimed was not justified. The interpretation of the Tribunal’s award and the computation of heads of compensation were defended as being within the evidence and policy limits, and the insurer urged to uphold the Tribunal’s determination rather than entertain a substantial enhancement.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.	2011 (13) SCC 236 : AIR 2011 SC 2951	Positive	Authority supporting higher notional income (Rs. 7,000) and multiplier considerations for a 64-year-old deceased, applied to enhance dependency loss.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN`** ``` FRIDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 29TH MAGHA, 1943 ``` ## **`MACA NO. 390 OF 2016`** ## **`AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 983/2010 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS`** ## **`TRIBUNAL , PALAKKAD`** ## **`APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:`** - **`1 KOCHAMMA, AGED 64 YEARS W/O. LATE K.P. VIJAYAN, DWARAKA, KUNNUKADU, ELAPULLY, PALAKKAD.`** - **`2 SUMA, AGED 40 YEARS W/O. SANKARA NARAYANAN, GANESHKRIPA, KUNNUKADU, ELAPULLY, PALAKKAD.`** - **`3 TARA, AGED 39 YEARS W/O. SHAILENDRA MENON, DWARAKA, KUNNUKADU, ELAPULLY, PALAKKAD.`** - **`4 V.K. SUNIL MENON S/O. LATE VIJAYAN, DWARAKA, KUNNUKADU, ELAPULLY, PALAKKAD.`** ## **`BY ADV SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN`** ## **`RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:`** ``` THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. ``` ``` N.S TOWERS, NEAR STADIUM BUS STAND, NEAR STADIUM, PALAKKAD. ``` ``` BY ADV LAL K.JOSEPH ``` ``` THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ``` ``` ON 18.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..2.. ``` ## **JUDGMENT** The appellants are the petitioners in O.P. (MV)No.983/2010 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad. They have approached this Court dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The parties are referred to as per their status in the claim petition. 2. According to the petitioners, on 3.10.2009, while deceased K.P.Vijayan was travelling in a stage carriage, he was thrown out of the rear exit of the vehicle which was kept open and he succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said fall. The petitioners claimed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/as total compensation for the death of K.P.Vijayan in the accident. ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..3.. ``` 3. The 1[st] respondent-owner and the 2[nd] ex respondent-driver, of the vehicle remained parte before the Tribunal. The 3[rd] respondent Insurance Company admitted existence of valid policy of insurance at the time of the accident; however, contended that the amount claimed is excessive and exorbitant. The Tribunal found that the accident happened due to the negligence of the 2[nd] respondent while driving the stage carriage. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.3,51,000/as total compensation under various heads as follows: |**Sl.** **No**|**Head under which** **compensation is** **claimed**|**Amount** **claimed (in** **Rupees)**|**Amount** **allowed (in** **Rupees)**| |---|---|---|---| |1|Loss of earning|30000|| |2|Partial loss of earning||| |3|Medical expenses|100000|| ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..4.. ``` |4|Bystander expenses|10000|| |---|---|---|---| |5|Damage to clothing etc|1000|| |6|Transporation|10000|| |7|Extra-nourishment|10000|| |8|Pain and sufering|30000|| |9|Loss of love and afection|50000|25000| |10|Loss of consortium|30000|100000| |11|Loss of estate|10000|5000| |12|Loss of dependency / economic benefts|400000|196000| |13|Loss of amenities and conveniences of life||| |14|Loss of earning power||| |15|Funeral expenses|10000|25000| |16|Disfgurement/ deformity||| ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..5.. ``` |17|Any other head||| |---|---|---|---| ||Total|500000|351000| 4. According to the petitioners, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is totally inadequate. It is contended by the petitioners that the deceased was hospitalised for 51 days. Though the petitioners claimed an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards bystander's expenses, no amount was awarded under the said head. Since the deceased was admitted in the hospital for 51 days, I am of the view that an amount of **Rs.10,000/-** shall be awarded under the head bystander's expenses. It is awarded. 5. No amount has been awarded under the head transportation to hospital. An amount of **Rs.1,000/-** is just and reasonable compensation ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..6.. ``` under the said head. Accordingly, the same is awarded. 6. Though an amount of Rs.1,000/- is claimed under the head damage to clothing, no amount is seen awarded. An amount of **Rs.500/-** can be awarded under the head damage to clothing. 7. Under the head loss of dependency, an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- has been claimed. The Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,500/-. The accident was of the year 2009 and taking note of the decision reported in **v. Ramachandrappa Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited** [2011 (13) SCC 236 : AIR 2011 SC 2951], the notional income of the deceased has to be taken as Rs.7,000/-. The Tribunal has rightly taken the multiplier as '7', as the deceased was aged 64 ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..7.. ``` years at the time of the accident. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for an amount of Rs.3,92,000/- [7,000x12x7x2/3]. After deducting the amount of Rs.1,96,000/- already awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioners are entitled for an enhanced amount of **Rs.1,96,000/-** under the head loss of dependency. In the result, the petitioners are entitled for an enhanced amount of **Rs.2,07,500/-** (Rupees two lakhs seven thousand and five hundred only) [1,96,000+ 10,000 + 1,000 + 500]. The 3[rd] respondent Insurance Company shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal with 9% interest from the date of petition till realisation along with proportionate costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. While calculating interest, the petitioners will be ``` MACA NO. 390 OF 2016 ..8.. ``` disentitled for interest for a period of 700 days as per order dated 18.01.2022 in C.M.Application No.1/2016. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. **Sd/-** **MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** SB/18/02/2022