National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Ammini

T.R. Ravi, J

M.A.C.A. No.831/2016 is filed by the 3rd respondent in O.P. (MV) No.220/2012 of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, who was the insurer of the offending vehicle and M.A.C.A.No.3532/2017 is filed by the claimants in the said claim petition. While the insurer submits that what has been awarded is excessive, the claimants submits that what has been awarded has to be enhanced.

Heard both sides.

The facts regarding the accident are admitted. While late Sri.Vijayan was walking along the road, he was hit by a car and he died as a result of the accident. The legal representatives preferred the claim. The Tribunal awarded a sum of ₹9,07,000/- towards compensation. According to the insurer, the amount awarded under the heads loss of dependency, funeral expenses, pain and sufferings and loss of love and affection, are all excessive. Regarding loss of dependency, it is submitted that 15% was added to the monthly income towards future prospects and only 10% ought to have been added having regard to the fact that the deceased was a mason aged 52 years. Regarding funeral expenses, it is submitted that a sum of ₹25,000/- was awarded, which ought to have been ₹15,000/-. It is submitted that having regard to the decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. reported in [2020 (3) KHC 760], the legal representatives are not entitled to claim compensation under the head pain and sufferings and the amount of ₹5,000/- granted under the said head is not justified. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has granted a sum of ₹2,50,000/- to the wife and two children towards loss of love and affection and a further sum of ₹1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium totalling to ₹3,50,000/-which is not justified. In the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision in New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Somwati & Ors. reported in [(2020) 9 SCC 644], it is submitted that a total sum of ₹1,20,000/- alone could have been granted, even if it is to be assumed that major sons are entitled to parental consortium and the sum of ₹3,50,000/- awarded under the head is highly excessive.

The learned counsel for the appellants in M.A.C.A. No.3532/2017 on the other hand submitted that going by the dictum laid down in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.Ltd., reported in [AIR 2011 SC 2951], the notional income ought to have been taken as ₹8,000/- and adding 10% towards future prospects, the monthly income should have been taken as ₹8,800/-. The learned counsel submits that the contention of the counsel for the insurer regarding the amount paid under the head loss of consortium is correct.

Having heard the counsel for the appellants in both the appeals, I am of the opinion that the award of the Tribunal is liable to be modified. An amount of ₹10,000/- is to be deducted from the compensation awarded under the head funeral expenses. An amount of ₹5,000/- granted towards pain and sufferings is also liable to be deducted from the total amount of compensation. An amount of ₹2,30,000/- is to be deducted from the compensation awarded under the two heads loss of love and affection and loss of consortium. Regarding the loss of dependency, the amount awarded has to be reworked on the basis of a notional income of ₹8,800/-which would come to ₹7,74,400/-. After deducting the amount of ₹5,06,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants in M.A.C.A.No.3532/2017 will be entitled to an additional compensation of ₹2,68,400/- under the head.

In the result, both the appeals are allowed. The appellants in M.A.C.A.No.3532/2017 are entitled to an additional compensation of ₹23,400/- (Rupees Twenty Three Thousand Four Hundred only) after deducting the sum of Rs.2,45,000/- found to be awarded in excess from Rs.2,68,400/- found due to the appellants as additional compensation under the head loss of dependency, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation, with proportionate costs. M.A.C.A.No.3532/2017 was filed with a delay of 598 days. The delay was condoned by order dated 07.11.2017, on condition that the appellants will not be entitled to interest on the enhance compensation awarded by this Court for 598 days. The interest payable on the additional compensation awarded by this judgment will be excluding the interest on the enhanced amount for the period of 598 days. The 3rd respondent insurer shall deposit the additional compensation granted in M.A.C.A.No.3532/2017 along with interest and proportionate costs, before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after deducting any amount to which the appellants are liable towards balance court fee and legal benefit fund. The disbursement of the compensation to the appellants shall be in accordance with law.