IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 MACA.No. 877 of 2006 ( ) OPMV.1193/1999 of MACT ALAPPUZHA APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS: 1 E.C.RETHY, W/O.RAGHAVAN, VATTATHARA VEEDU THRICHATTUKULAM P.O. CHERTHALA. 2 SRUTHI, D/O.RAGHAVAN, OF DO. DO. 3 LAYA, D/O.RAGHAVAN, OF DO. DO. 4 SNGEETH, S/O.RAGHAVAN, OF DO. DO. BY ADV.SRI.T.B.SARASAN SRI.M.V.BAIJU RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:- 1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTNHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R2 SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No. 877 of 2006 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 20th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV) No.1193/1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha. They are the wife and three minor children of deceased Raghavan who died in a motor accident. In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 7, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.3,01,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and a cost of Rs.4,000/-. 2. The accident occurred on April 7, 1999. While deceased Raghavan was travelling in a K.S.R.T.C. Super Fast bus along Kollam-Thiruvananthapuram National Highway, it collided head on with a mini lorry. As a result of MACA 877/2006 2 the accident, he sustained severe head injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Chirayinkeezh on the same day. Alleging negligence against the driver of the K.S.R.T.C. bus, the claimants filed the O.P. (MV) before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs.6 lakhs. 3. The 1st respondent, the Managing Director of the K.S.R.T.C., filed a written statement admitting the accident but contending that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the K.S.R.T.C. bus and the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the mini lorry. The 2nd respondent Insurance Company filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts. A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the K.S.R.T.C. bus and awarded a MACA 877/2006 3 compensation of Rs.3,01,000/-. Dissatisfied with the said compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellants, the counsel for the K.S.R.T.C. and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the K.S.R.T.C. bus and that the deceased died as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident are not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,01,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of dependency : Rs.2,64,000 Funeral expenses : Rs. 5,000 Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000 Transport to hospital : Rs. 2,000 Loss of consortium : Rs. 10,000 MACA 877/2006 4 Loss of love and affection : Rs. 15,000 ------------------ Total : Rs.3,01,000 ======== 8. The counsel for the appellants sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of dependency and on other heads. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, took Rs.2,000/- per month as his contribution to his family and adopted a multiplier of 11 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,64,000/- for the loss of dependency. The deceased was working as Senior Superintendent, Government Polytechnic, Neyyattinkara and drawing a salary of Rs.8,190/-, as evidenced by Ext.A7 salary certificate. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/-, as he was aged 54 and as he has only one year for his superannuation. The above reasoning of the Tribunal appears to be not justified. Even after his retirement, the chance of him being gainfully employed MACA 877/2006 5 cannot be ruled out. Taking into consideration the above fact and the fact that at the time of his death he was drawing a salary of Rs.8,190/-, we are of the view that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.5,000/-, which comes to Rs.60,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, balance amount of Rs.40,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. Multiplier taken by the Tribunal as 11 appears to be correct, as deceased was aged 54 at the time of the accident. Thus, calculated for the loss of dependency, the appellants/claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,40,000/-. After deducting Rs.2,64,000/- already granted by the Tribunal, they are entitled an additional compensation of Rs.1,76,000/- on this count. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering endured by the deceased, which appears to be very low. As the deceased died some time after the accident, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. MACA 877/2006 6 11. The Tribunal did not award any amount for damage to clothing and for transport to hospital. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that the appellants/claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.500/- for damage caused to clothing and Rs.1,000/- towards transport to hospital. 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 will stand. 12. In the result, the appellants/claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,82,500/- (Rupees one lakh eighty two thousand five hundred only). The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and also for the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization. They are also entitled to MACA 877/2006 7 proportionate costs. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount within two months from this date with notice to the claimants. The appeal is disposed of as found above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.