IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2010 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1932 MACA.No. 2111 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.1165/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): THIRD RESPONDENT -------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. ERNAKULAM REP BY THE MANAGER KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD ERNAKULAM COCHIN -35 BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 --------------- 1. K.KUNJU @ KUNJUKUNJU AGED 59, S/O.NARAYANAN RAGA SUDHA, NEAR S.N.V.P SCHOOL, KOTTAPPURAM TRIPUNITHURA PO, NADAMA VILLAGE 682 301 KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. N.SATHA, AGED 56,W/O.KUNJU RAGA SUDHA, NEAR S.N.V.P SCHOOL, KOTTAPPURAM TRIPUNITHURA PO, NADAMA VILLAGE 682 301 KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. 3. M/S. HIGH WAY FREIGHT CARRIES (P) LTD PLOT NO. 128, IND AREA, PHASE I, PANCHUKULA, HARYANA. 4. MOHAMMED SALLUDDIN SHAIK, YADAV NAGAR, LALA NO.918, NEAR HARI MASJID, NEAR INAMPANVALA, KHAIRANI ROAD, SAKINAKA,MUMBAI. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.2111 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the third respondent/Insurance Company in O.P. (MV)No.1165/2005 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. In this appeal the appellant challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated April 20, 2010 awarding a compensation of Rs. 6,75,000/- to the claimants for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Manoj Kumar in a motor accident. 2. Claimants are the parents of deceased Manoj Kumar, who died in a motor accident that occurred on November 2, 2004 at about 8.45 a.m. near Gandhi Nagar fly over bridge at Mumbai. The accident happened while the deceased was riding his motor cycle, it collided head on with a lorry bearing Reg.No.HR 68/0090. Deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital on the same day. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the driver of the lorry, the MACA.No.2111/2010 2 claimants filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending lorry remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent/Insurance Company filed a written statement before the Tribunal admitting the policy. Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent/Insurance Company before the Tribunal. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 6,75,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent Insurance Company has now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and the counsel for the claimants. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal MACA.No.2111/2010 3 that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent is not seriously challenged. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. 6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 6,75,000/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under : Loss of dependency - Rs. 6,30,000/- Transportation & funeral exp. - Rs. 10,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 10,000/- Loss of love and affection - Rs. 20,000/- Loss to estate - Rs. 5,000/- 7. Counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 15,000/- and awarded Rs. 6,30,000/- for loss of dependency which is excessive. There is no merit in the above contention. Deceased was a B.Tech degree holder and was working in a private firm earning Rs. 14,492/- per month which is proved by Ext.A18, degree certificate , Ext.A19, letter of appointment of the deceased and the evidence of PW2, the MACA.No.2111/2010 4 Manager of the company in which deceased was employed. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in fixing his monthly income as Rs. 15,000/-. The Tribunal took the monthly contribution of the deceased to his family as ½ of the monthly income and adopted a multiplier of 7 and awarded Rs. 6,30,000/- for loss of dependency which in our view is just and reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. Therefore, we hold that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not excessive. That being so, we find no merit in this appeal and the same has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.2111/2010 5