High Court Kerala High Court

L.J. Savithri vs M.R. Purushothama Kurup on 29 February, 2008

Kerala High Court
L.J. Savithri vs M.R. Purushothama Kurup on 29 February, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MFA No. 728 of 2001()



1. L.J. SAVITHRI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. M.R. PURUSHOTHAMA KURUP
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.K.ALEX

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.JAYASANKAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.PADMANABHAN NAIR

 Dated :29/02/2008

 O R D E R
                                K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J.

                          -------------------------------------------------

                                     M.F.A.No.728 of 2001

                          -------------------------------------------------

                       Dated, this  the 29th  day of February, 2008

                                           JUDGMENT

The additional claimants 2 to 6 in O.P.(MV) No.813/1990 on the file of

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha are the appellants. Additional

claimants 2 to 6 are the legal representatives of original claimant deceased

Narayanan Rajan. The deceased original claimant was the husband of first

appellant and father of appellants 3 to 6. He sustained injuries in a road traffic

accident occurred on 17.10.1987. He filed Original Petition impleading

owner/driver and insurer of tempo van bearing registration No.KRA 7941,

claiming an amount of Rs. One lakh as compensation. It was averred that at about

7.30 a.m. on 17.10.1987 while he was travelling in a tempo van bearing

registration No.KRA 7941 belonging to first respondent, on account of the rash or

negligent driving of the first respondent the vehicle capsized and he sustained

injuries. First respondent filed a written statement contending that he was not the

owner or driver of the vehicle in question but he was the owner and driver of

vehicle bearing registration No.KRA 7949 which involved in the accident in which

the claimant was a passenger. Negligence alleged was disputed. Quantum of

compensation claimed was also disputed. Second respondent insurer filed a

written statement admitting the existence of a valid insurance policy. It was

contended that the insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured on account of

MFA No.728/2001 2

violation of the permit. Original Petition was filed on 18.4.1988. During the

pendency of Original Petition original claimant died on 24.8.1993. Without

taking note of that aspect Tribunal dismissed the Original Petition for default on

10.12.1993. Present appellants who are legal representatives of deceased original

petitioner filed I.A.No.33/1994 on 7.1.1994 to restore the Original Petition

dismissed for default and to implead them as additional claimants. On 21.7.1998

that application was allowed by the Tribunal and thereafter the case was heard and

disposed of on 25.10.2000. Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.16,810/- as

compensation with 12% interest per annum from 21.7.1998, the date on which the

Original Petition was restored to file after dismissed for default. Aggrieved by the

quantum of compensation and also the denial of interest the additional claimants

themselves have filed this appeal.

2. Original claimant had produced a disability certificate in which the

disability was fixed at 8%. He sustained fracture of proximal phalanx of little

finger, middle finger and ring finger of left hand and contusion over right buttock

and fleshy injuries on other parts of the body. It is true that the original claimant

died. Tribunal took a view that injured died two years after his retirement and

awarded only Rs.1,920/- as loss of earnings. For pain and suffering Tribunal

awarded Rs.5,000/- alone. Considering all aspects of the matter I am of the view

that on account of the disability, loss of amenities, loss of expectation of life, etc.

the Tribunal ought to have awarded at least Rs.7,500/- more as compensation. So

MFA No.728/2001 3

the appellants are entitled to get Rs.7,500/- as additional compensation.

3. Now I shall consider whether the appellants are entitled to get

interest for any period prior to 21.7.1998. Original Petition was filed on

18.4.1988. Certain defects were noted and on 25.4.1988 Original Petition was

returned for curing the defects. It was re-presented on 16.7.1990 along with

I.A.No.584/1990 for condoning the delay. That application was dismissed on

13.10.1993 and Original Petition itself was dismissed on 10.12.1993. In the

meanwhile original claimant died on 24.8.1993. On 7.1.1994 the present

appellants filed a petition for restoration and also for impleading them as

additional claimants. So I am of the view that interest ought to have been awarded

at least from 7.1.1994 onwards. Tribunal had awarded interest at the rate of 12%

from 21.7.1998 onwards. Appellants are entitled to get interest on Rs.16,810/- at

the rate of 12% per annum from 7.1.1994. But for the enhanced compensation

they are entitled to get 7.5% interest per annum from 7.1.1994 till the date of

deposit of compensation. On deposit, the appellants can withdraw the entire

amount.

K. PADMANABHAN NAIR,

JUDGE.

cks

MFA No.728/2001 4

K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J.

M.F.A.No.728 of 2001

JUDGMENT

29th February, 2008.