Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeAppeals allowed; enhanced compensation awarded ...

MACA Nos. 1291 of 2012 and 1292 of 2012 (Alavikutty & Fathima v. Manoj Kumar M. & KSRTC; Ahammed Koya & AyishaKutty v. Manoj Kumar M. & KSRTC)

Case / Petition Number:MACA No. 1291 of 2012; MACA No. 1292 of 2012

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Mary Joseph
Judgment Date
2022-09-23
Court Decision / Holding
The High Court allowed both MACAs, increasing compensation by applying Pranay Sethi-inspired enhancements — 40% future prospects and appropriate deductions — and a higher multiplier, resulting in revised totals. The KSRTC is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with the original award (if not already deposited), plus interest at 7.5% per annum, within two months from receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Final Disposition
Appeals allowed; enhanced compensation awarded and directed to be deposited along with the original awards, with interest at 7.5% per annum within two months.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • ALAVIKUTTY, S/O.MONTHEENKUTTY, KOZHIKKODAN, CHERUPUZHUTHINIMMAL HOUSE, PARAPPALIYALIL, CHEEKKODE AMSOM, OMANOOR DESOM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
  • FATHIMA, W/O.ALAVIKUTTY, KOZHIKKODAN, CHERUPUZHUTHINIMMAL HOUSE, PARAPPALIYALIL, CHEEKKODE AMSOM, OMANOOR DESOM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
  • AHAMMED KOYA, S/O.KOYAKUTTY, KAKKAD HOUSE, KUNMMINIPARAMB P.O., PALLIKKAL AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
  • AYISHAKUTTY, W/O.AHAMMED KOYA, KAKKAD HOUSE, KUNMMINIPARAMB P.O., PALLIKKAL AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

Respondents

  • MANOJ KUMAR M., S/O.KUMARAN, MYLANKUNNATH HOUSE, PUTHUSSERY P.O., KANHIRANGODE, MANANTHAVADI, WAYNAD DISTRICT, PIN-671 531
  • THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • SRI.BABU S. NAIR
  • • SRI.K.RAKESH

Counsels for Respondents

  • • SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A., STANDING COUNSEL, KSRTC

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two Motor Accident Claims Appeals (MACA Nos. 1291 and 1292 of 2012) arise from awards of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, in O.P.(M.V.) Nos. 679 of 2008 and 758 of 2008. The petitions were filed by legal heirs of two deceased young riders who perished after a KSRTC bus (Registration KL 10 4615) allegedly dashed into their motorcycle on 26.12.2007. In MACT, the Tribunal held the KSRTC driver negligent and awarded Rs. 2,07,000 and Rs. 2,91,000 as compensation for the two cases. The appellants argued for higher compensation, contending the deceased were 22 years old and that the tribunal should apply higher multipliers (18 instead of 13 and 9) and adjust the income, future prospects, and deductions as per prevailing jurisprudence. They urged for a higher monthly income (Rs. 6,000) and a 40% enhancement for future prospects as per Pranay Sethi, with 50% deduction for personal expenses, and enhanced heads for loss of estate, funeral expenses, and loss of love/consortium. The High Court accepted some arguments and recalculated compensation, applying a higher multiplier and future-prospects enhancement, arriving at increased sums (Rs. 7,26,200 for MACA 1291 and Rs. 8,10,200 for MACA 1292). The Court directed deposit of the enhanced amounts along with the original awards, with interest at 7.5% per annum, within two months.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Future prospects doctrine (Pranay Sethi)
  • Multiplier method for calculating dependency loss
  • Deduction for personal living expenses (50%)
  • Loss of estate, funeral expenses, and loss of consortium as heads of compensation

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended that both deceased were aged about 22 years at the time of death. They argued that the Tribunal should have applied a multiplier of 18 (instead of 13 and 9) and that the monthly income of Rs. 3,500 should be raised, potentially to Rs. 6,000. They pressed for 40% enhancement for future prospects under the Pranay Sethi guidelines, with a 50% deduction for personal expenses, and claimed Rs. 15,000 for loss of estate and funeral expenses, Rs. 10,000 for loss of love and affection, and Rs. 40,000 for the loss of consortium to each parent. They urged a higher monthly income and a recalculated dependency figure, producing an enhanced compensation (Rs. 7,26,200 for MACA 1291 and Rs. 8,10,200 for MACA 1292) after applying the revised multiplier, income, and future prospects. They sought deposit of the enhanced sums within two months, with interest.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argued that the rider of the motorcycle bore responsibility for the accident due to rash and negligent riding, claiming the rider overtook the KSRTC bus from its left side. They contended that the quantum awarded by the Tribunal was not exorbitant and disputed any higher compensation. The challenge was primarily to the quantum, not the finding of negligence.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)PositiveThe court applied the Pranay Sethi formulation for determining future prospects and related enhancements, treating the cited decision as a positive authority for computing compensation in fatal accident claims.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against MACA Nos. 1291 of 2012 and 1292 of 2012 (Alavikutty & Fathima v. Manoj Kumar M. & KSRTC; Ahammed Koya & AyishaKutty v. Manoj Kumar M. & KSRTC) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH`** ``` FRIDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 1ST ASWINA, 1944 ``` ## **`MACA NO. 1291 OF 2012`** ``` AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 16.11.2011 IN O.P(M.V) NO.679/2008 OF ``` ``` MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI ``` ## **`APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:`** ``` 1ALAVIKUTTY, S/O.MONTHEENKUTTY, KOZHIKKODAN, CHERUPUZHUTHINIMMAL HOUSE, PARAPPALIYALIL, CHEEKKODE AMSOM, OMANOOR DESOM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2FATHIMA, W/O.ALAVIKUTTY, KOZHIKKODAN, CHERUPUZHUTHINIMMAL HOUSE, PARAPPALIYALIL, CHEEKKODE AMSOM, OMANOOR DESOM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR SRI.K.RAKESH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1MANOJ KUMAR M., S/O.KUMARAN, MYLANKUNNATH HOUSE, PUTHUSSERY P.O., KANHIRANGODE, MANANTHAVADI, WAYNAD DISTRICT, PIN-671 531. 2THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. ``` ``` R2 BY ADV. SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A., STANDING COUNSEL, KSRTC ``` ``` THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BBEN FINALLY HEARD ``` ``` ON 23.09.2022, ALONG WITH MACA.1292/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH ``` ``` FRIDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 1ST ASWINA, 1944 MACA NO. 1292 OF 2012 ``` ``` AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 24.01.2012 IN O.P(M.V) NO.758/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , MANJERI ``` ## **`APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:`** - **`1 AHAMMED KOYA, S/O.KOYAKUTTY, KAKKAD HOUSE, KUNMMINIPARAMB P.O., PALLIKKAL AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`2 AYISHAKUTTY, W/O.AHAMMED KOYA, KAKKAD HOUSE, , KUNMMINIPARAMB P.O., PALLIKKAL AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** ``` BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR SRI.K.RAKESH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 MANOJ KUMAR M., S/O.KUMARAN, MYLANKUNNATH HOUSE, PUTHUSSERY P.O., KANHIRANGODE, MANANTHAVADI, WAYNAD DISTRICT, PIN-671 531.`** - **`2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.`** - **`R2 BY ADV. SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A., STANDING COUNSEL, KSRTC`** ## **`THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY`** ``` HEARD ON 23.09.2022, ALONG WITH MACA.1291/2012, THE COURT ``` ## **`ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:`** ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 3 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ## **`Dated this the 23[rd] day of September, 2022`** Both these appeals are originated from an award passed in O.P(M.V.)Nos.679/2008 and 758/2008 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. The appellants are legal heirs of victims who died in a motor accident. Challenge is raised against the award for the reason that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is unjust and unreasonable. The cause of action for the claim petitions was originated at 12.30 pm on 26.12.2007. A KSRTC bus bearing Registration No.KL 10 4615 dashed a motor cycle and thereby the rider as well as the pillion rider sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to those at the spot itself. The accident was allegedly occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus by the 1[st] respondent. Claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- each original petitions have been moved by the legal heirs of the deceased seeking for compensation. ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 4 ``` 3. The respondents contested the original petitions by raising objections that the rider of the motorcycle was responsible for causing the accident by his rash and negligent riding. According to them, the rider had overtaken the KSRTC bus through its left side and thereby the accident was resulted. The quantum claimed as compensation is also disputed for being exorbitant. 4. In O.P(M.V.) No.758/2008 the petitioners marked Exts.A1 to A3 in evidence. The respondents did not adduce any evidence. On appreciation of evidence adduced as above, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that the driver of the KSRTC bus has caused the accident by its rash and negligent driving. The Tribunal also found the petitioners entitled to get compensation for the death of the victim and arrived at Rs.2,07,000/- as the compensation payable. That award is under challenge in MACA No.1292/2012. 5. In MACA No.1291/2012, the averments of the claimants about the motor accident and the negligence aspect ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 5 ``` are common. The deceased was the rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KL 10AA 5877. Exts.A1 to A3 were marked in evidence on the side of the petitioners. Respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Tribunal arrived at a finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the KSRTC bus. The Tribunal also found the petitioners entitled to get compensation and arrived at a sum of Rs.2,91,000/-. Aggrieved thereby MACA No.1291/2012 was filed. 6. Arguments were advanced by the counsel for the petitioners on the following lines. The deceased in both cases are aged 22 years at the time of their death. Therefore the multiplier ought to have been taken by the Tribunal as 18 instead of 13 and 9 respectively taken in O.P.(M.V) Nos.679/2008 and 758/2008. The monthly income for the purpose of computation of compensation is taken by the Tribunal in both cases as Rs.3,500/- which is too low and canvassed for considering Rs.6,000/-. According to the respective counsel, 40% enhancement in monthly income in ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 6 ``` consideration of future prospects as per the direction of the Apex Court in **National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi** [2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)] ought to have been taken by the Tribunal. Deceased being bachelors, 50% ought to have been deducted in consideration of the personal expenditure incurred by them, had they been survived. Towards loss of estate and funeral expenses the Tribunal ought to have granted Rs.15,000/- each. Rs.10,000/- was granted as compensation under the head, loss of love and affection. It was canvassed that Rs.40,000/- ought to have been considered as compensation for loss of consortium in favour of each of the parents of the deceased, instead of Rs.10,000/- awarded towards loss of love and affection. The deceased being aged only 22 years and unmarried at the relevant time of the accident, this Court is justified in taking 40% addition to the monthly income in consideration of future prospects and deducting 50% of the monthly income arrived at as above in consideration of personal expenses. Therefore, the monthly ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 7 ``` income for computation of compensation is arrived at as Rs.4,200/-. The compensation when assessed based on the above modification in monthly income and the substituted multiplier of 18, with other factors taken by the Tribunal maintained, the sum payable towards loss of dependency would be Rs.9,07,200/- (4200x12x18). Under the head funeral expenses and loss of estate Rs.15,000/- each is awarded. Rs.40,000/- is awarded under the head filial consortium to each of the parents of the deceased, instead of Rs.10,000/awarded towards loss of love and affection. In the above calculation, the appellants in M.A.C.A No.1291/2012 would get Rs.7,26,200/- (Rupees Seven lakh Twenty six Thousand and Two Hundred only) and those in M.A.C.A No.1292/2012 would get Rs.8,10,200/- (Rupees Eight lakh Ten thousand and two hundred only) as additional compensation. Both M.A.C.As are allowed by granting additional compensation as above. Second respondent in each cases shall deposit the compensation originally awarded by the Tribunal (if ``` M.A.C.A.Nos.1291 & 1292 of 2012 ``` ``` 8 ``` not already deposited) as well as that arrived at by this Court as additionally payable with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum within a period of two months from the date on which a copy of this judgment received by it. Sd/- **MARY JOSEPH** **JUDGE** NAB