IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2008 / 31ST BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 1589 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.2327/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS ------------------------------------- 1. MRS. SALMATH BEEVI, W/O.LATE ASHRAF P.M., THOMMITHAZHATHU HOUSE, SANTHIGRAM COLONY, VADAKKUMBHAGOM KARA. 2. SHAMMER(MINOR), S/O.LATE ASHRAF P.M., REP. BY HIS MOTHER, MRS.SALMATH BEEVI OF THOMMITHAZHATHU HOUSE, SANTHIGRAM COLONY, VADAKKUMBHAGOM KARA. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. K.G.THANKAPPAN, S/O.GOPALAN, KUTTIYATHU HOUSE, VAZHOOR P.O. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., K.K.ROAD, PONKUNNAM. 3. NABEESA BEEVI, MADATHIL HOUSE, T.P.PURAM, VAZHOOR P.O., BY ADV. SRI. P.R. RAMACHANDRAN MENON (SC) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.9.2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 1589 OF 2005 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P.(MV) No. 2327 of 1998 for the death of the husband of the first appellant who is the father of the second appellant. 2. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent - Insurance Company. On going through the award, we find that it is a common award passed in two claim petitions, one filed by the child and the mother of the first wife of the deceased and the other by the second wife and minor child of the deceased. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,77,800/- and directed apportionment of the amount between the mother of the first wife and the second wife of the deceased at the rate of Rs.50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- respectively and the balance amount was ordered to be shared equally M.A.C.A. NO.1589/2005 2 between the two minor children. 3. In appeal before us, the appellants contended that the monthly income of the deceased fixed at Rs.1,700/- for determining compensation for loss of dependency is too low. Even though Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company pointed out that there is no proof of income of the deceased, we find that the deceased was a fish vendor by profession and was aged only 26 years at the time of his death. Considering the age of the deceased, we feel he would have been able to earn a much better income in the fish business which is a lucrative trade and even in the absence of any evidence, which is difficult to be produced in the nature of business carried out by the deceased, his monthly income can be fixed at Rs.3,000/-. After reckoning one-third towards personal expenses, we fix Rs.2,000/- as his monthly income and consequently, all the claimants will be entitled to Rs.4,32,000/- as compensation for loss of dependency as against Rs.2,77.800/- awarded by the Tribunal. Even though the appellants in the connected Original Petition are not before us, we feel that they are also entitled to the benefit of enhancement of compensation being granted by us in this appeal. Consequently, we direct the Insurance Company to deposit the additional compensation with interest at the rate of 7 1/2 % per annum from the date of application till the date of payment M.A.C.A. NO.1589/2005 3 equally in the name of the two minor children of the deceased born in the two wives. The compensation granted by the Tribunal to the first appellant herein and the mother of the first wife of the deceased will stand confirmed. The appeal is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.1589/2005 4 C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO. 1589/2005 JUDGMENT 22nd September, 2008 M.A.C.A. NO.1589/2005 5