The court established that notional income for minors must reflect their potential, and compensation for filial consortium and love and affection can coexist.

J U D G M E N T

[ MACA No.1975/2021 and Cross Objection No.144/2021]

The appeal is preferred by the claimant dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in OP(MV) No.773/2018. The cross objection is preferred by the insurance company questioning the fixation of notional income and granting of compensation under the head love and affection by the tribunal.

2. The facts for the disposal of the above cases are as follows: On 30.4.2017 at about 9.30 a.m., one Ridin while pillion riding on motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-53-G-9936 from Panniyankara to Palazhi and when he reached near Pottammal Junction, a bus hearing registration No.KL-57-J-5499 driven in a rash and negligent manner by R2 in the claim petition, came and hit the motorcycle, by which the deceased sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the same. At the time of the accident, the deceased was a diploma student in Nettur Technical Training Foundation. Claiming compensation, the father and mother of the deceased along with his minor sister and the grandmother approached the tribunal.

The tribunal on appreciation of evidence on record fixed the notional income at Rs.12,000/- and added 40% towards future prospectus and granted a total compensation of Rs.19,94,400/- as follows:

3. On behalf of the claimants, Exts.A1 to A14 documents were marked and PW1 was examined. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on the side of the insurance company. The claimants are before this Court aggrieved by the insufficiency in the quantum of compensation granted by the tribunal, whereas the insurance company has preferred the cross objection contending that the quantum of compensation granted by the tribunal under the head love and affection is excessive.

4. Heard Smt.Manju M., the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, and Sri.Ajeesh Emmanuel, the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company.

5. The questions raised in both the appeal and the cross objection being intertwined, it would be expedient for this Court to consider the appeal preferred by the claimants for enhancement at first instance, since the decision of this Court in the appeal for enhancement of the notional income would decide the fate of the cross objection.

6. The Tribunal proceeded to fix the notional income of the student at Rs.12,000/- per month, basically since it was unable to determine the exact quantum of notional income liable to be fixed in such cases.

7. InAngad Tiwari and Another vs National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another (Civil Appeal No.10950 of 2024) decided on 01.10.2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in respect of a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the tribunal and the high courts shall not fix the notional income not below the minimum wage notified under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act . Following the said decision, this Court in Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. V. Mujeeb Rahman [2025 KLT Online 1097] authored by ES(J), held that in respect of a death of a minor, the tribunal and courts should calculate the notional income in terms of the minimum wage fixed by the State of Kerala in terms of the provisions of the . In G.O(P)No.56 of 2017 dated 28.04.2017, the State of Kerala has fixed the minimum wage at Rs.17,325/- in respect of a coolie worker. Considering the educational prospects and also the bright future the minor child had at the time of accident, this Court is