IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 192 of 2001()
1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. PARUKUTTY NARAYANAN
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.MATHEWS JACOB
For Respondent :SRI.BABY THOMAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :24/10/2007
O R D E R
J.B. KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ.
—————————-
M.F.A.No. 192 of 2001
—————————-
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2007
Judgment
Koshy,J.
This appeal is filed by the insurance company
contending that quantum of compensation awarded by the
tribunal was very high and insurance company is not
liable to compensate the claimants for the death of their
dependent. An elderly person died in an accident on
21.7.1993. While walking along the road, he was hit by
the autorickshaw bearing registration No. KL 5/2735
insured by the appellant insurance company. Eight legal
representatives (wife and children) filed an application
for compensation. Tribunal awarded only Rs.50,000/- with
interest. With regard to the quantum of compensation,
the deceased was a blacksmith. Even though Rs.1,500/-
was claimed as monthly income, in the absence of
evidence, only Rs.1,000/- was taken as the monthly income
which is below the notional income for a non-earning
M.F.A.No.192/2001 2
person fixed under the Second Schedule. Considering the
old age, only 5 was taken as the multiplier. Therefore,
at no stretch of imagination, it can be stated that
multiplier adopted was excessive or more than just and
reasonable compensation was awarded.
2. The tribunal found that the driver of the
autorickshaw insured by the appellant was responsible for
the accident because the driver had no valid driving
licence and there is violation of policy conditions. The
tribunal accepted the above contention and allowed the
insurance company to recover the amount from the insured.
The Supreme Court in various cases including National
Insurance Company Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur and others (AIR
2004 SC 1340) and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v.
Nanjappa and others (AIR 2004 SC 1630) held that when
there is violation of insurance policy, statutory third
party liability of the insurance company cannot be
evaded, but, due to violation of policy condition,
insurance company is entitled to recover the same from
the insured. Coverage of the vehicle by the policy
issued by the appellant insurance company is not
disputed. The tribunal has given the right to recover
M.F.A.No.192/2001 3
the amount from the insured. In the above circumstances,
we see no ground to interfere in the award.
Appeal dismissed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
K. HEMA
JUDGE
vaa
M.F.A.No.192/2001 4
J.B. KOSHY AND
K.HEMA,JJ.
————————–
M.F.A.NO.192 OF 2001
————————–
Judgment
Dated:24th October, 2007