MACA. No.1480/2014 1 2025:KER:20242 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 24TH MAGHA, 1946 MACA NO. 1480 OF 2014 AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 30.09.2013 IN OPMV NO.231 OF 2006 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,ATTINGAL APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS 1 LILLY, AGED 54 YEARS W/O.SURESH, GOMATHI MANDIRAM, VADASSERIKONAM (P.O), VARKALA,CHEMMARUTHI VILLAGE. 2 SUNI AGED 28 YEARS S/O.SURESH, GOMATHI MANDIRAM, VADASSERIKONAM (P.O), VARKALA,CHEMMARUTHI VILLAGE. 3 SANDYA AGED 26 YEARS D/O.SURESH, GOMATHI MANDIRAM,VADASSERIKONAM (P.O), VARKALA,CHEMMARUTHI VILLAGE. 4 SUHRADA LATHA AGED 73 YEARS W/O.PUSHPANGATHAN, LAKSHAM VEEDU, (5- B)THANNIMOODU, CHERUNNIYOOR (P.O), VARKALA BY ADV SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS MACA. No.1480/2014 2 2025:KER:20242 1 P.SUBBIAH PILLAI S/O.PARADESI PILLAI, 19, VAGAYADI NORTH STREET,KOTTAR, NAGARCOIL (P.O), KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT,TAMIL NADU, PIN - 629004 2 A.VELAYUDHAN S/O.ANDIAPPA PILLAI, 3C, UCHIMAHALI AMMAN COMPOUND KAMPALAM, KOTTAR, NAGARCOIL (P.O), K.K.DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 629004. 3 THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.II, ST.MARY VILLA, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE (P.O),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN - 695 011. 4 V.C.THOMAS S/O.CHACKO, FLAT NO.207, WOODLANDS APARTMENTS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014. 5 THE BRANCH MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD,BRANCH OFFICE, NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND, ATTINGAL (P.O), PIN - 691 101. BY ADVS. SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN-SC FOR R3 SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY-SC FOR R5 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA. No.1480/2014 3 2025:KER:20242 J U D G M E N T Dated this the 13th day of February, 2025 The petitioners in O.P.(M.V.) No.231/2006 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Attingal are the appellants herein. The above O.P was filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. (For the purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal). 2. The petitioners are the wife, children and mother of the deceased by name Suresh, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 7.7.2005. According to the petitioners, on 7.7.2005 at about 1 a.m., while the deceased was driving a lorry bearing registration No.KL-01/D 1816, along the Thiruvananthapuram- Nagercoil NH road, another lorry bearing No.TCZ-8222 hit against his lorry and as a result of which the deceased sustained fatal injuries and he succumbed to the injuries on the same day. 3. The 1st respondent is the owner , the 2nd respondent is the driver and 3rd respondent is the insurer of the lorry bearing No.TCZ-8222. 4th respondent is the owner and 5th respondent is the insurer of the lorry No.KL-01/D 1816. MACA. No.1480/2014 4 2025:KER:20242 4. The insurance companies filed written statements, admitting the accident as well as policy, but disputing the negligence on the part of the respective drivers. 5. The evidence in the case consists of documentary evidence Exhibits A1 to A9. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. 6. After evaluating the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,45,500/- and found that there was 50% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and therefore reduced the quantum of compensation to 1,72,750/-. 7. Aggrieved by the finding of the Tribunal reducing the compensation to 1/2 on finding contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, the petitioners preferred this appeal. 8. Now the point that arises for consideration is the following: 1) Whether there was any contributory negligence on the part of the deceased? 2) Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable? 9. Heard Sri. C.R. Sivakumar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners/appellants and Sri. P.M.M. Najeeb Khan, the learned Standing MACA. No.1480/2014 5 2025:KER:20242 Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and Smt. T.C. Sowmiavathy, learned Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent. 10. It is well settled that in a claim under Section 163 A of the MV Act, negligence need not be looked into. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in deducting 50% of the compensation on the ground that there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Therefore, the above finding of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 11. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the quantum of compensation assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 43, and the monthly income claimed was Rs.3,200/- per month. Therefore, the annual income claimed will come to Rs.38400/-. Presumably, the monthly income was limited to Rs.3200/- per month to bring the claim under section 163A of M.V.Act, the annual outer income limit of which is Rs.40000/-. As per the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision in Ramachandrappa v. Manger, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236], the notional monthly income of a coolie, in the year 2005 will come to Rs.5000/-. In the above circumstance, the notional annual income of the petitioner for the purpose of assessing the compensation due under section MACA. No.1480/2014 6 2025:KER:20242 163A of the M.V.Act is fixed at Rs.40,000/-. 12. As per the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, the compensation payable to the legal representatives of a victim within the age group 40 and 45 with annual income Rs.40000/- is Rs.560000/-. Out of which 1/3 is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. After deducting 1/3, the compensation payable will come to Rs.373333/-. In addition to the same, the petitioners are entitled to get a sum of Rs.2000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate. Since no medical bills are produced, they are not entitled to get any compensation towards medical expenses. Therefore the total compensation payable to the petitioners will come to Rs.3,82,833/- 13. Therefore, the petitioners/ appellants are entitled to get a total compensation of Rs.3,82,833/-, as modified and recalculated above and given in the table below, for easy reference: Sl. No. Head of Claim Amount awarded by Tribunal (in Rs.) Amount Awarded in Appeal (in Rs.) 1 Loss of dependency 3,36,000/- 373333 Funeral expenses 2,000/- 2,000/- 3 Loss of estate 2500/- 2,500/- MACA. No.1480/2014 7 2025:KER:20242 4 Loss of consortium 5,000/- 5,000/- Total 3,45,500/-(Reduced to 172750) 3,82,833/- Amount enhanced 210,083 14. In the result, this Appeal is allowed and the respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit a total sum of Rs.3,82,833/- (Rupees three lakh eighty two thousand eight hundred and thirty three only), less the amount already deposited, if any, along with interest at the rate ordered by the Tribunal, from the date of the petition till deposit/realisation, excluding interest for a period of 115 days, the period of delay in filing the appeal, with proportionate costs, within a period of two months from today. (enhanced compensation will carry interest @8%) 15. On depositing the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the entire amount to the petitioners, in the ratio fixed by the Tribunal, excluding court fee payable, if any, without delay, as per rules. Sd/- C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE sou.