IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2011 / 24TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 2146 of 2005() --------------------- OP(MV) NO. 290/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM ................ APPELLANTS / PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------ 1. OMANA P.N., W/O. LATE K. SUKUMARAN, VAKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADAKKEKARA, VEROOR P.O., CHETHIPPUZHA VILLAGE. 2. ALAN. S., S/O. SUKUMARAN (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER THE 1ST APPELLANT HEREIN 3. ANUMOL. S., D/O. LATE SUKUMARAN (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER THE 1ST APPELLANT HEREIN. 4. THANKAMMA, W/O. LATE KEASAVAN, VADAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARAL, VAZHAPPALLY P.O. 5. KUNJUMOL T., D/O. LATE KESAVAN OF DO - DO. BY ADVS. SRI.V.K.SUNIL SMT.P.G.MARY LUCY BIYANCA RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE MV (OP) : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. VRINDA, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, PATTOLI MARKET P.O., PUTHIYAVILA. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, THIRUVALLA. 3. JAMES, S/O. VARGHESE, KOTTOOR HOUSE, CHETHIPPUZHA, KADAVU BHAGOM, CHETHIPPUZHA VILLAGE. R2 BY ADV. SRI. V.P.K..PANICKER R3 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No.2146 of 2005 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 14th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV) No.290 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam. They are the widow, two minor children, mother and unmarried sister of deceased Sukumaran who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 3, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs.2,69,800/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of the deceased in the accident. 2. The accident occurred on December 11, 2002 on the M.C.Road at Palathra Bhagom in Vazhappally Village within the jurisdiction of Changanassery Police Station. While Sukumaran was driving his auto-rickshaw bearing registration No.KL5/6857 he was knocked down from behind by a Maruthi car bearing registration No. KL4F/5400 driven by the 3rd respondent. He sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained MACA 2146/2005 2 while undergoing treatment at Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. Alleging negligence against 3rd respondent, driver of the offending car, the claimants filed the Original Petition before the tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 6 Lakhs. 3. The 1st respondent, the owner of the offending car, remained absent before the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent, the insurer of the offending car, in its written statement admitted the policy. The 3rd respondent, the driver of the offending car admitted the accident but denied the liability and attributed negligence to the deceased. PW1 was examined and Exts. A1 to A10 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident occurred due to negligence of the 3rd respondent driver of the offending car and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,69,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and a cost of Rs.7,000/-. The claimants have MACA 2146/2005 3 come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and the learned counsel for Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 3rd respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation ? 6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,69,800/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of love and affection : Rs. 10,000 and consortium. Pain and suffering : Rs. 10,000 Funeral expenses : Rs. 2,000 Loss of estate : Rs. 2,500 Loss of dependency : Rs.2,40,300 Property loss : Rs. 5,000 ------------------ Total : Rs.2,69,800 ======== MACA 2146/2005 4 7. The learned counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of compensation for the loss of dependency, pain and suffering endured, for loss of love and affection and for loss of consortium. 8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, took the balance amount of Rs.1,335 as his monthly contribution to the family, adopted a multiplier of 15 as the deceased was aged 43 at the time of the accident and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,40,300/- towards the loss of dependency. PW1 widow testified before the Tribunal that as an auto-rickshaw driver the deceased used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can reasonably be fixed at Rs.3,000/-, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses balance amount of Rs.24,000/- per annum can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. Multiplier of 15 adopted by the MACA 2146/2005 5 Tribunal is not seriously challenged. Thus, for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.3,60,000/- (Rs.24,000/- x 15). Thus, the claimants are entitled an additional compensation of Rs. 1,19,700/- on this count. 9. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering endured and Rs.10,000/- for loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, which appears to be very low. Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the age of the claimants and in the circumstances of the case, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- for loss of love and affection and Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium would be reasonable. Thus, the claimants are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.25,000/- on these counts. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore,we are not disturbing the same. Regarding the apportionment of the compensation amount and disbursement of the same, the direction of the Tribunal MACA 2146/2005 6 will stand. 10. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to additional compensation of Rs.1,44,700/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and also for the enhanced compensation. They are entitled to proportionate costs. The second respondent insurer of the offending car shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimants. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn. MACA 2146/2005 7