Back
2013 Supreme(Ker) 333
High Court of Kerala
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.
S. Sudha & Others
Versus
Union of India, rep. by Cabinet Secretary, Govt of India, New Delhi & Others
R.F.A Nos. 366, 263 & 932 of 2012 & 814 of 2011
Decided on : 24-06-2013
For the Appellants:Blaze K. Jose, Mrs. B. Bindu, Mrs. N. Deepa, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1 & R6, Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, Sr. Panel CGC, R2 to R5, C.S. Manilal, Ramaprasad Unni, Sr Government Pleaders, M.R. Sudheendran, Mrs. A. Afreezaa Khan, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the defendants for the aircraft accident and the application of the principles for assessment of damages in cases of fatal accidents.
Headnote:
Aircraft Accident - Liability of Defendants - Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, Aircraft Act, 1934, Aircraft Rules, 1937 - The court held that the defendants, who arranged the air show, and the defendant who deputed the Pilot to participate in the show, are primarily liable to compensate the plaintiffs. The State of Kerala and the Government of Karnataka are vicariously liable. The court applied the principles for assessment of damages in cases of fatal accidents and awarded compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an aircraft accident in which the Chief Flight Instructor of the Kerala Aviation Training Centre (KATC) died. The legal representatives of the deceased filed a suit claiming compensation for the negligence and breach of duty of the defendants. The trial court found that the accident did not happen due to the negligence of the deceased and awarded compensation to the plaintiffs. The appeals were filed challenging the adequacy of compensation and the liability of the defendants.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the defendants who arranged the air show and the defendant who deputed the Pilot to participate in the show are primarily liable to compensate the plaintiffs. The State of Kerala and the Government of Karnataka are vicariously liable. The court applied the principles for assessment of damages in cases of fatal accidents and awarded compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased.
Issues: The main issues were the liability of the defendants for the aircraft accident, the adequacy of compensation awarded by the trial court, and the liability of the State of Kerala and the Government of Karnataka as vicariously liable parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the defendants who arranged the air show and the defendant who deputed the Pilot to participate in the show are primarily liable to compensate the plaintiffs. The State of Kerala and the Government of Karnataka are vicariously liable. The court applied the principles for assessment of damages in cases of fatal accidents and awarded compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased.
Final Decision: The appeals filed by the defendants were disposed of as follows: (a) Defendants 1 and 6 were exonerated from the liability of paying any compensation to the plaintiffs. (b) Defendants 2 and 5 and defendants 3 and 4 were dismissed without costs. (c) The plaintiffs were granted a decree allowing them to realize a sum of Rs.4,30,000 from defendants 2 to 5 together with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of decree till realization. (d) The appellants in R.F.A No.366 of 2012 were entitled to receive costs on the original suit and proportionate costs in this appeal.
Ramakrishna Pillai, J.
1. Under challenge in these first appeals filed by the unfortunate legal representatives of the victim of an aircraft accident on 22.2.1997, the State of Kerala, the State of Karnataka and the Union of India, is the verdict of the Principal Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, in O.S.No.79 of 1999. For convenience of discussion, the parties can be referred as they are arrayed in the original suit.
2. The first plaintiff is the mother, the second plaintiff is the widow and the third and fourth plaintiffs are the children of late Captain Raj Kumar, who was the Chief Flight Instructor of the Kerala Aviation Training Centre (KATC), the fourth defendant. The fourth defendant is under the administrative control of the State of Kerala, the second defendant. The fourth defendant is managed by a Committee consisting of the President, the Vice President, the Honorary Secretary and other members.
3. Formerly, the fourth defendant was known as Trivandrum Flying Club, a private limited company under the Companies Act, 1956. In the year 1980, the Government of Kerala decided to take over the company and changed its name into 'The Kerala Aviation Training Centre'. The rules and regulations regarding flying and engineering sections are put forth by Director General of Civil Aviation, the sixth defendant.
4. Late Captain Raj Kumar joined the service as Assistant Flight Instructor under the fourth defendant on 26.4.1980 and he was in-charge of the flying activities as Flight Instructor, since 1.1.1989. There were complaints of delayed promotion, however, his minimum pay was fixed by the sixth defendant as per Circular dated 9.9.1991, which according to the plaintiffs is much lower than that prevalent in other flying clubs. Allegedly, Late Captain Raj Kumar had a credit record of 17 years continuous flying. Though he was offered a higher pay by other flying clubs, he opted to continue with the fourth defendant; it was alleged by the plaintiffs.
5. In February 1997, an air show was organised by the Government Flying Training School, Bangalore, the fifth defendant and Agni Aero Sports Adventures Private Limited, Bangalore, the seventh defendant. The aircraft 'CESSENA FA 152' which late Captain Raj Kumar was piloting, was owned by the Aero Club of India and was operated by the fourth defendant. On 22.2.1997, the aircraft took off at 16.25 hours with late Captain Raj Kumar as the Pilot and late Captain Satheesh Radhakrishnan as Co-Pilot, for demonstration. While carrying out a 'Wing Over Manoeuvre' the aircraft somehow hit the ground and burst into flames. Both the occupants sustained fatal injuries.
6. According to the plaintiffs, the death of late Cap.Raj Kumar was due to the negligence and breach of duty and obligations of the defendants.
7. The second defendant (Government of Kerala) and the third defendant (Government of Karnataka) filed a joint written statement before the trial court. They admitted that late Cap.Raj Kumar, the Chief Flight Instructor, died in an air crash at Bangalore on 22.2.1997 during the course of the program 'Fly-in 1997' conducted by the training establishment wherein, all flying clubs in India participated. The mishap occurred while this aircraft was doing a 'Wing Over Manoeuvre'. They stated in their written statement that they have done everything possible to get maximum reliefs to the plaintiffs. It was pointed out that on the recommendation of the fourth defendant, a sum of Rs.1.5 lakhs was given as ex gratia payment to the plaintiffs, who are the legal representatives of the victim. It was further pointed out that the fourth defendant had taken an insurance policy from the Oriental Insurance Company which covered the risk of the aircraft and the crew. The fourth defendant had preferred a petition before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressel Commission, which was considered along with the claim petitions preferred by the legal representatives of both the deceased. Allowing th
