IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 1263 of 2004() ----------------------- OPMV.459/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANTS: ------------------------------------ 1. ABRAHAM JACOB, KANJIRPILLIL HOUSE, NO.IV/37, THAIKATTUKARA, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE. 2. SHEEBA ANU JACOB, D/O.ABRAHAM JACOB, H.NO.235, AISWRYA NAGAR, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD COLONY, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O. ALUVA WEST VILLAGE. 3. SHEELA SUSAN JACOB, D/O.ABRAHAM JACOB, KANJIRAPPILLIL HOUSE,H.NO.IV/37, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE. REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY SHEEBA ANU JACOB. 4. SUNIL ABRAHAM JACOB, S/O.ABRAHAM JACOB, AGED 36 YEARS, 2C SURYA TEJA APARTMENT, MYTHRI NAGAR, PANDURANGAPURAM, VISHAKHAPATTANAM 530 016. 5. ANIL JACOB, S/O.ABRAHAM JACOB, AGED KANJIRAPPALLIL, HOUSE NO.IV/37, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE. REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SHEEBA ANU JACOB. BY ADVS. SMT.SALLY THOMAS CHACKO SRI.P.T.THOMAS SMT.A.B.MANJU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. UNNI, S/O.RAGHAVAN.V.V. VELLOYAKKULAM HOUSE, THEKKMBHAGOM, CHOWARA, VILLAGE, ALUVA. 2. V.P.JABBAR, S/O.PAREEKUNJU, VILLAPPALLY, MADAKKATHANAM P.O. MOOVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO,LTD., EBENEZER GARDEN, IST FLOORT NEAR EDAPPALLY, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL JUNCTION, KOCHI 682 024. ADVS. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 1263 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. The first appellant died after this appeal was preferred, it is submitted. They claimed compensation in respect of the death of the wife of the first appellant and the mother of appellants 2 to 5. The deceased was aged 55 years at the time of the accident which took place on 18.10.1995. The first appellant was seriously laid up and it is said that the deceased was a house wife managing the affairs of the home. She also rendered the requisite services for the disabled, the first appellant, and was discharging the duties of a home nurse also. However, subsequent to the death of the deceased, the appellants had to engage a person to look after him for a period exceeding ten years. Such services had to be procured on payment by the appellant. The deceased succumbed to the injuries on the date of the accident itself. 2. Before the Tribunal, PW.1 was examined and the relevant documents were marked. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all M.A.C.A. NO. 1263/2004 2 the relevant inputs, proceeded to pass the impugned award directing payment of an amount of Rs.1,41,300/- as per the details shown below: i. Transportation to hospital :Rs. 2,500/- ii. Damage to clothing :Rs. 300/- iii. Loss of estate :Rs. 5,000/- iv. Loss of conjugal society :Rs. 20,000/- v. Loss of love and affection :Rs. 10,000/- vi. Pain and suffering :Rs. 5,000/- vii. Funeral expenses :Rs. 2,500/- viii. Loss of dependency/service :Rs. 96,000/- :(1500x2/3x12x8) --------------------- Total :Rs.1,41,300/- --------------------- The said amount was directed to be paid along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and costs. 3. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Called upon to explain the nature of the grievance which the appellants want to mount against the impugned award, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the multiplicand and the multiplier adopted are not sufficient, reasonable or just. The appellant had lived for a period M.A.C.A. NO. 1263/2004 3 exceeding ten years after the death of his wife and in these circumstances, it would have been very reasonable to assume the multiplier to be at least 10, though the multiplier applicable to persons in the age group of 55 to 60 is only 8. Counsel contends that in the peculiar circumstances of the case, a higher multiplier should have been adopted by the Tribunal. We take note of the fact that for persons in the age group of 50 to 55, the multiplier, as per the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, is 11, We are not persuaded to agree that even in the light of the fact that the first appellant had continued to live for a period exceeding ten years, it is necessary to deviate from the multiplier fixed under the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act. We accept the decision of the Tribunal in reckoning 8 as the multiplier, in the given circumstances, as reasonable. 4. Coming to the dispute about the multiplicand, we note that there is satisfactory evidence to indicate that the first appellant was aged about 65 years on the date of the accident and he was disabled and needed service of a person to attend to him right through. In addition to the responsibilities of the deceased in managing the home, she had the burden also to render service to the appellant. While trying to translate the value of service rendered by the deceased , it would be unrealistic not to take into account this dimension of her service and her usefulness. We are M.A.C.A. NO. 1263/2004 4 satisfied, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, notwithstanding the fact that the deceased was a home maker and not earning any particular income, that reckoning of Rs.2,000/- per mensem to be absolutely reasonable. The multiplicand can hence be raised to Rs.2,000/-. 5. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled to a further amount of Rs.32,000/- [(2000x12x2/3x8) i.e. 1,28,000/- minus Rs.96,000/-] in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal. Needless to say that the entire compensation amount shall carry interest as directed by the Tribunal from the date of the petition. 6. The appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. (R. BASANT) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO. 1263/2004 5 R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO.1263/2004 JUDGMENT 4th March, 2009 M.A.C.A. NO. 1263/2004 6