CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 10 KL CK 0129

Sneha C. Menon vs Hari. C.C., Sahida and United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 1 October 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.Q. Barkath Ali, J · A.K. Basheer, J
CASE NUMBER
MACA No. 397 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 338 words

A.K. Basheer, J.—This appeal is by the claimant who was involved in a road traffic accident. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 60270/-towards compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant. According to the appellant the accident occurred while she was travelling as a pillion rider on a two wheeler. After quantifying the compensation the Tribunal proceeded to hold that the Insurance Company would not be liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle since the policy was an ''Act Only'' policy.

2.

The primary grievance of the appellant is that the Tribunal was not justified in exonerating the Insurance Company, especially since evidently the policy was a ''package policy''.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company fairly submits that the policy was in fact a ''package policy''. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the Tribunal exonerating the Insurance Company is set aside. It is held that the 3rd respondent Insurance Company shall be liable to pay the compensation.

4.

The appellant has a further case that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is too meager and inadequate considering the nature of the injuries sustained by her. The appellant was aged 16 at the time of the accident. She had sustained fracture shaft of femur (L) apart from other minor injuries. Since the appellant had not produced any disability certificate, the Tribunal rightly refused to grant any compensation under that head.

5.

However, the Tribunal is seen to have awarded a sum of Rs. 7000/- for "discomforts and inconveniences". It has come out in evidence that the appellant was constrained to use a walking stick for a considerable period and the injury had affected her studies for a few months. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that the amount of Rs. 7000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head "discomforts and inconveniences" can be enhanced to Rs. 20,000/-. We do so. To that extent the award is modified.

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.