IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 942 of 2004 ---------------------- OPMV.416/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN O.P.M.V. ------------------------------------------------ 1. ROSILY, WIDOW OF KOCHAPPAN, ACHANDY HOUSE, VIJAYARAGHAPURAM P.O. MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. NOJY, S/O.LATE KOCHAPPAN, DO. DO. 3. SAJI.A.K. S/O.LATE KOCHAPPAN, DO. DO. 4. PAILAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): REPONDENTS IN O.P.M.V. ------------------------------------- 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. TRIVANDRUM-PANGODE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. MANSOOR, S/O.HASSAN, NIZAM MANZIL, ANAMKUDIMURI P.O. PANGODE, TRIVANDRUM. 3. MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, P.B.NO.434, ST.JOSEPH'S PRESS BUILDINGS, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM - 14. ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R3 SRI.JAMES KOSHY.N., SC. KSRTC FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 942 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JULY 29, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)416/2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. They are the wife, children and father of deceased Kochappan who died in a motor accident which occurred on March 25, 2000 at about 5.30 p.m. at Potta Ashramam junction near Chalakkudy. 2. The accident happened while the deceased was cycling along the Ernakulam - Thrissur road, he was knocked down by the bus bearing Regn.No.KL-15/3841. He sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, driver of the bus, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, owner and driver of the offending bus, remained absent before the Tribunal. Respondent 3, insurer admitted the policy, but contended that there was also negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. PW.1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A7 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced M.A.C.A.942 of 2004 2 by the contesting 3rd respondent. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,72,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard counsel for the appellants/claimants and the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd 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. 7. The break up of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is as under: loss of dependency 1,44,000/- pain and suffering 10,000/- loss of consortium 10,000/- loss of love and affection 5,000/- funeral expenses 3,000/- 8. The Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation awarded for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal M.A.C.A.942 of 2004 3 took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1500/- and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, took Rs.1000/- as his monthly contribution to his family and adopted a multiplier of 12 as he was aged 48 at the time of the accident and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,44,000/- for the loss of dependency. According to the claimants, the deceased was working in a granite quarry and was getting Rs.150/- per day. Taking into account the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs.2500/- which comes to Rs.30,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs.20,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. As he was aged 48 at the time of the accident, we feel that a multiplier of 13 would be reasonable in this case. Thus calculated, for the loss of dependency the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.2,60,000/-. Thus on this count the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,16,000/-. 9. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5000/- for loss of love and affection which appears to be quite inadequate. Taking into consideration the age of claimants 2 and 3, the children of the deceased, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus on this count the claimants are entitled to an additional M.A.C.A.942 of 2004 4 compensation of Rs.10,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 10. Thus the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,26,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The 3rd respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 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 mt/-