LOK 2026 (10) Ker. 163
High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam
Motor Accident Claims Appellate Jurisdiction
Shoba Annamma Eapen, J.
M.A.C.A. No. 2745 of 2016; October 16, 2026
Nadaraj N. & Ors. v. A. S. Francis & Ors.
Motor accident compensation — Death of a 19-year-old bachelor — Notional income — Future prospects — Loss of dependency — Parental consortium — Conventional heads — Duplication of compensation — Enhancement of award
The legal heirs of a motorcyclist who died following an accident on 7 September 2011 sought enhancement of the Tribunal’s award of ₹7,55,000. The deceased was stated to be employed as a supervisor earning ₹12,000 per month, but the salary certificate was not proved through his employer. The appeal challenged the income assessment and compensation under several heads.
Held (allowing the appeal in part):
(1) Notional income and loss of dependency: For the 2011 accident, notional monthly income was refixed at ₹8,000. Adding 40% for future prospects, deducting one-half for personal expenses and applying multiplier 18, loss of dependency was recalculated as ₹12,09,600, an increase of ₹5,61,600. Ramachandrappa, Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma applied. (Para 5, heads I and VI)
(2) Conventional heads and consortium: Loss of estate was increased to ₹18,150. The parents were granted ₹48,400 each towards consortium, totalling ₹96,800. Funeral expenses were reduced from ₹25,000 to ₹15,000. The separate awards of ₹25,000 for loss of love and affection and ₹40,000 for mental agony were deleted; ₹15,000 was granted for pain and sufferings. An award for love and affection alongside consortium would duplicate compensation. Somwati followed. (Para 5, heads II–V)
(3) Modified award and deposit: Total compensation was revised to ₹13,61,550, yielding an additional ₹6,06,550 with interest at 7% per annum from the petition date until realization and proportionate costs. No interest is payable on the enhanced amount for the 94-day delay in filing the appeal. The insurer shall deposit the additional amount, interest and costs within two months of receiving a certified copy. The claimants shall supply PAN, Aadhaar and bank details within one month; failing that, deposit may be made before the Tribunal. (Paras 6–7)
For Appellants: Sri. Rahul Sasi; Smt. Neethu Prem.
For Respondents: Shri. P. Jacob Mathew; Sri. Mathews Jacob (Sr.).
J U D G M E N T
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J.
This appeal is filed by the claimants in OP (MV) No.13 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Paravur, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.
2. According to the claimants, on 07.09.2011, at about 01.30 p.m., while the deceased was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-42/E-5770, along the Puthuvypu – LNG road, an autorickshaw bearing registration KL-42/C-7233 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner, rammed into the motorcycle, whereby, the deceased was thrown on the road causing injuries and subsequently, succumbed to the same on the way to the hospital. The claimants being the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹25,76,000/-, which is limited to ₹17,00,000/-.
3. Though notice was served on the first and second respondents, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle respectively, they remained absent and were set ex parte before the tribunal. The third respondent/insurer filed a written statement, admitting the insurance policy, denying the liability and disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A10 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, found that the accident was due to negligence on the part of the second respondent and the appellants/claimants were awarded a sum of ₹7,55,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs against the third respondent being the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned standing counsel for the respondent insurer.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants claims enhancement mainly under the following heads:
I. Notional Income: The learned counsel for the claimants submitted that though an amount of ₹12,000/- was claimed as the monthly income of the deceased, who alleged to be a supervisor at Anjaly Works, Vypin, the tribunal had taken only ₹6,000/- as the monthly income. Ext.A10 salary certificate was produced to prove the income of the deceased, whereas, the said document was not proved through the examination of the employer. However, considering the fact that the accident was in the year 2011, even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236], and in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to re-fix the notional monthly income at ₹8,000/-.
II. Loss of estate: Though an amount of ₹1,00,000/- was claimed by the claimants towards loss of estate, the tribunal had awarded only ₹10,000/-. Following the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017 (4) KLT 662], the compensation under conventional heads ought to have been ₹15,000/- and further, 10% enhancement has to be given in a span of three years from 2017. Hence, the appellants will be entitled for a total amount of ₹18,150/- under the head loss of estate and accordingly, there will be an additional amount of ₹8,150/- under the said head.
III. Funeral expenses: On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹25,000/- towards funeral expenses. However, going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the maximum amount of funeral expenses ought to have been granted by the tribunal is ₹15,000/-. Thus, there will be a deduction of ₹10,000/- under this head.
IV. Loss of consortium/loss of love and affection/mental agony: The learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the tribunal has not granted any compensation towards loss of consortium. Since the deceased was a bachelor and both parents of the deceased were alive at the time of his death, following Pranay Sethi (supra), the appellants are entitled to ₹40,000/- each towards loss of consortium. Also, following Pranay Sethi (supra), they are also entitled to get 10% enhancement in a span of three years after 2017. Thus, the claimants are awarded a total compensation of ₹48,400/- each towards loss of consortium, totalling to ₹96,800/- (48,400 x 2).
The learned standing counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the tribunal had awarded an amount of ₹25,000/- under the head loss of love and affection, which is impermissible. In New India Assurance Company v. Somwati and others [2020 (5) KLT OnLine 1198], it has been held that once compensation is awarded under the head loss of consortium, no amount shall be awarded under the head loss of love and affection as it would amount to duplication. Accordingly, I delete ₹25,000/- awarded by the tribunal under the head loss of love and affection.
The learned Standing Counsel for the insurance company submitted that the tribunal had awarded an amount of ₹40,000/- under the head mental agony, which is not legally permissible in a claim for compensation arising out of death. I find force in the said submission. In view of the principles laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra), compensation towards mental agony is not awardable separately in a death claim, particularly when the legal heirs are compensated under the head of loss of dependency and consortium. Accordingly, the amount of ₹40,000/- awarded by the tribunal under the said head is liable to be deleted.
V. Pain and sufferings: Though the claimants had claimed an amount of ₹50,000/- under the head pain and sufferings, no amount was awarded by the tribunal. Having regard to the pain and suffering suffered by the deceased due to the accident, I find it appropriate to grant an amount of ₹15,000/- under the afore head.
VI. Compensation for future loss of contributions(Loss of dependency): Since the deceased was aged 19 years at the time of accident, following the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), 40% of the future prospects is to be added towards the monthly income now fixed and the income would be ₹11,200/- (8,000 x 40% +8,000) for awarding compensation under the head, loss of dependency. The deduction towards his personal and living expenses is 1/2 since the deceased was a bachelor; and the multiplier to be adopted is “18”. Hence, following the apex court judgments in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [2010(2) KLT 802(SC)], the total compensation payable under the afore head is recalculated thus: ₹12,09,600/- (11,200 x 12 x 18 x 1/2). Since the tribunal had awarded an amount of ₹6,48,000/- under the said head, there will be an additional amount of ₹5,61,600/- towards loss of dependency.
6. Though the appellants claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. Since the appeal is of the year 2016, I find it reasonable to award interest @ 7% per annum for the enhanced amount.
7. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows:
| Sl. No. | Head of Claim | Amount claimed (in Rs.) | Amount awarded by the tribunal (in Rs.) | Amount modified in appeal (in Rs.) | Total compensation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pain and sufferings | 50,000 | Nil | 15,000 | 15,000 |
| 2 | Compensation for future loss of contributions | 19,20,000 | 6,48,000 | 5,61,600 | 12,09,600 |
| 3 | Loss of love and affection | 2,00,000 | 25,000 | -25,000 | Deleted |
| 4 | Loss of consortium | – | – | 96,800 | 96,800 |
| 5 | Medical expenses | 50,000 | – | – | – |
| 6 | Transport to hospital | 3,000 | 5,000 | Not modified | 5,000 |
| 7 | Funeral expenses | 50,000 | 25,000 | -10,000 | 15,000 |
| 8 | Damage to clothing | 3,000 | 2,000 | Not modified | 2,000 |
| 9 | Short expectation of life | 1,00,000 | Nil | – | – |
| 10 | Compensation for mental agony | 1,00,000 | 40,000 | -40,000 | Deleted |
| 11 | Loss of estate | 1,00,000 | 10,000 | 8,150 | 18,150 |
| Total amount (which is limited to) | 25,76,000 17,00,000 |
7,55,000 | 6,06,550 | 13,61,550 |
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellants/claimants are awarded an additional compensation of ₹6,06,550/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Six Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Only) over and above the compensation awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs. The third respondent insurer shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The appellants shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR Card and bank details before the respondent insurer within a period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount before the tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount shall be disbursed to the appellants at the earliest in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation will not carry interest for the period of delay of 94 days in filing the appeal.