Subair Kunju and Others v. The National Insurance Co. Ltd.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945 OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT EP 206/2022 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER(S)/ DECREE HOLDER(S)/ PETITIONER(S):`** - `1 SUBAIR KUNJU .J AGED 68 YEARS S/O. ABDUL JABBAR, NASEEBA MANZIL, MANJAMALA P.O, THACHAPPALLI, KEEZHATHONNAKAL, KUDAVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 695506` ``` 2SABEEDA BEEVI .S AGED 50 YEARS W/O. SUBAIR KUNJU .J, NASEEBA MANZIL, MANJAMALA P.O, THACHAPALLI, KEEZHATHONNAKAL, KUDAVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 695506 3NASEEBA .S AGED 29 YEARS D/O. SUBAIR KUNJU .J, NASEEBA MANZIL, MANJAMALA P.O, THACHAPPALLI, KEEZHATHONNAKKAL, KUDAVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 695506 4THANSI .S AGED 27 YEARS D/O. SUBAIR KUNJU .J, NASEEBA MANZIL, MANJAMALA P.O, THACHAPALLI, KEEZHATHONNAKAL, KUDAVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 695506 ``` ``` BY ADVS. BENCILAL B.S. RINU. S. ASWAN GOPIKA H.H LEKSHMY I. ``` ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 2 ## **`RESPONDENTS/ JUDGMENT DEBTOR(S)/ 3RD RESPONDENT:`** ``` THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR, ST. JOSEPH'S PRESS BUIDING, OPP. COTTON HILL SCHOOL, VAZHUTHACAUD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 695014 ``` ``` SRI. GEORGE A. CHERIAN – SC ``` ``` THIS OP (MAC) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioners are the legal representatives of deceased Muhammed Riyas who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 14.09.2018. The Tribunal passed Ext.P5 interim award and the amounts were disbursed to the petitioners in terms of the award. Later, the Tribunal modified the interim award as per Ext.P7 based on order dated 21.02.2022 in a review petition filed by the petitioners. In the review petition, an objection was raised by the Insurance Company that the private investigator had filed a report before the insurance company stating that the petitioners are not the children of the deceased. The Tribunal rejected the said contention. Paragraphs 3 to 5 of Ext.P6 order read thus:- “3.The said contention is rejected as a whole for manifold reasons. Firstly, the report is not produced. Secondly the source of information is not disclosed. So ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 4 the report allegedly submitted by the private investigator need not be considered and the argument is rejected. ## 4.I find no impediment in allowing the petition. The documents produced clearly indicate the relationship between the deceased and petitioners. 5.Hence petition is allowed. Office to release the amount to the petitioners as per the award. Office to carry out necessary correction in the award and copies accordingly.” (underlining supplied) 2. The petitioners filed Ext.P8 Execution Petition (E.P. No. 206/2022) before the Tribunal for execution of the amount in terms of the modified award. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Tribunal is yet to dispose of the Execution Petition and they pray for disbursement of the amount as per Ext.P8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Tribunal is insisting for legal heirship certificate for disbursement of the amount. The petitioners contend that in the light of Ext.P6 order, the Tribunal cannot insist for legal heirship 5 ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` certificate as the documents already produced before the Tribunal clearly indicate relationship between the deceased and the petitioners as found by the Tribunal in Ext.P6. The learned counsel for the petitioners also relies on the decision of this Court in **Sreerangan v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd and another [2014 (4) KLT 378]** wherein this Court considered the question whether a legal heirship certificate is required for disbursement of amounts to the dependents who claim compensation before the Tribunal, as legal representatives. In paragraphs 13 and 14 of the said judgment, this Court held as follows:- “13. What emerges hence is the clear principle upon which, the entitlement to claim compensation, on the death of a person in a motor accident, is to be adjudicated upon. Any ‘legal representative’ including a ‘legal heir’ and not confined to a subsisting status governed by the laws of succession, would be entitled to claim compensation; provided he/she sustains an injury ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 6 from the death caused by the motor accident; the injury being not one to be understood as once caused to the body of the individual involved in an accident. 14. The father of the deceased, who is the petitioner herein, had approached the Tribunal, together with his wife claiming ‘loss of dependency’ on the death of his son in a motor vehicle accident. The petitioner, hence, is entitled to the sum awarded, as apportioned to himself in the award, even without the production of a legal heirship certificate. It is also declared and the impugned order is set aside, directing the Tribunal to disburse the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-[Rupees one lakh only] to the petitioner herein, with any interest accrued, within three weeks of the production of a certified copy of this judgment.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners also refers to the decision in **Baburaj M. v. State of Kerala [2022 (4) KLT 609]** wherein this Court had occasion to consider the question as to whether succession certificate of the legal representatives of the deceased shall be insisted for release of compensation in a motor vehicle accident. This Court ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 7 ## held in paragraphs 15 to 17 as hereunder:- “15. In a decision reported in [2014 KHC 5801 : 2014 ACJ 2501], **Sabnam & Ors. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd,** a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court considered the necessity of succession certificate while claiming compensation by the legal representatives of the deceased in motor accident cases and it was held that succession certificate could be granted only in respect of ‘debts’ and ‘securities’ and the compensation amount under the Motor Vehicles Act did not come under ‘debts’ or ‘securities’. 16. Thus the law emerges is that production of succession certificate is mandatory as per Section 214(1) (b) of the Succession Act when the decree holder dies in cases where the decree amount comes under the category ‘debts’ or ‘securities’. Therein also, there is an exception that when the decree holder dies after deposit of the amount before the court, production of succession certificate is not necessary to withdraw the amount by the legal representatives. 17. Similarly, compensation arising out of motor accident or compensation arising out of land acquisition proceedings or cases involving grant of compensation under the Electricity Act, etc. would not come under the purview of ‘debts’ or ‘securities’. Therefore, in such cases production of succession certificate is not ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 8 mandatory and the legal representatives or legal heirs, as the case may be, have to convince their status before the court concerned otherwise to realise the compensation.” 4. Placing reliance on judgment of this Court dated 21.02.2023 in W.P.(C ) No. 8280 of 2013, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that there shall be no liability of tax TDS on the payment of interest over and above the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that they have already deposited the compensation award as per Ext.P8 before the Tribunal on 25.01.2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the details with regard to bank account, PAN card etc have already been produced by the petitioners before the Tribunal on 04.01.2022. I have gone through the pleadings and materials 9 ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` on record. The only apprehension of the petitioners is that the Tribunal will not release the amount without production of the legal heirship certificate. Since the accident occurred in the year 2018, there will be direction to the Tribunal to dispose of E.P.No.206 of 2022 pending on its file, as expeditiously as possible, after taking note of Ext.P6 order and the decisions of this Court referred to above, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. The original petition is disposed of. ## **`Sd/-`** ``` MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE ``` bnu ``` OP (MAC) NO. 110 OF 2023 ``` 10 ## **`APPENDIX`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16.03.21 Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE DECEASED MOHAMMED RIYAS DATED 20.04.15 Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE RATION CARD DATED NIL Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD OF THE DECEASED MUHAMMED RIYAS DATED NIL Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM AWARD IN I.A NO. 10902/18 IN O.P( M.V) NO. 2803/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE M.A.C.T, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 28.05.19 Exhibit P6A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I. A NO. 2307/21 IN O.P (M.V) NO. 2803/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE M.A.C.T, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 21.02.22 Exhibit P7A TRUE COPY OF THE CORRECTED AWARD IN O.P (M.V) NO. 2803/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE M.A.C.T, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 21.02.22 Exhibit P8A TRUE COPY OF THE E.P NO. 206/22 IN O.P (M.V) NO. 2803/18 DATED 01.05.22 Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT. 20-05-23 & 29-6-23 IN E.P NO. 206 OF 2022 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE M.A.C.T, TRIVANDRUM Exhibit P10A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P (M.A.C) NO. 67/21 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 12.7.21 ```