IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 1595 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.103/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. AYSATH SHAMSHAD, W/O.NISSAR AHAMMED, MERIKA HOUSE, BELA, CHARLA P.O., MANJESHWAR VIA, KALOOR VILLAGE. 2. FATHIMA AFRA, AGED 2 YEARS, D/O.NISSAR AHAMMED, (MINOR) REP. BY MOTHER AYSATH SHGAMSHAD, RESIDING DO. 3. S.P.MOHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUNHI, S.P.HOUSE, GALIMUGA, KARNOOR P.O., KAVU VIA, PUTTUR TALUK, KARNOOR VILLAGE. 4. FATHIMATH ZUHRA, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O.S.P.MOHAMMED KUNHI, RESIDING DO. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PRAKASH.K., S/O.RAGHUVEERA RAO, RESIDING AT BEEJANTHADKA HOUSE, BADIADKA, PERDALA P.O. 2. K.GANESHA, S/O.K.RAGHUVEERA RAO, SRIDEVI NILAYA, BEEJATHADKA HOUSE, PERDALA P.O. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., M.G.ROAD, KASARAGODE. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1595 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. They are the wife aged 22 years, daughter aged 2 years and both parents aged 52 years and 42 years of the deceased – a person aged about 30 years at the time of his death. They claimed an amount of Rs.15 lakhs as compensation. The deceased claimed to be a business man getting an income of Rs.12,000/- per mensem. Before the Tribunal, Exts.A1 and A2 were marked. No other evidence – oral or documentary, was made available. The Tribunal, in these circumstances, came to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled only an amount of Rs.2,35,500/- as per the details shown below: M.A.C.A. No. 1595 of 2006 -: 2 :- 1. For pain and suffering - Rs.5,000/- 2. For funeral expenses - Rs,2,000/- 3. For loss of estate - Rs.2,500/- 4. For loss of consortium - Rs.5,000/- 5. For loss of love and affection - Rs.5,000/- 6. For loss of dependency - Rs.2,16,000/- (1500 x 12 x 2/3 x 18) ------------------- Total - Rs.2,35,500/- ======== 2. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned award. What is the grievance? The learned counsel for the appellants explains that the multiplicand reckoned by the Tribunal is unrealistic and painfully low. Even the absence of any better evidence, reasonable inference ought to have been drawn about the income of the deceased aged about 30 years and having wife aged 22 years, a minor daughter aged 2 years and parents depending upon him. Notwithstanding the inability/failure on the part of the appellants to make authentic and specific data available before the Tribunal about the probable income of the deceased, reasonable and fair inferences must have been drawn. In any case, the multiplicand reckoned i.e., Rs.1,500/- per mensem is incorrect and unacceptable, contends the learned counsel for the appellants. M.A.C.A. No. 1595 of 2006 -: 3 :- 3. The learned counsel for the appellants further contends that considering the age of the wife, daughter and parents as also the deceased, the amounts awarded under the heads of loss of consortium as well as loss of love and affection do also warrant appellante interference with the impugned award. 4. On an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs we find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants. We are satisfied that Rs.2,000/- per mensem must have been the irreducible monthly income of the deceased. We take the view that in the absence of satisfactory evidence, it is only the claimants who can be left to suffer. But even then, we are satisfied that Rs.2,000/- per mensem can safely be accepted as the multiplicand. Consequently, the appellants are entitled to a further amount of Rs.72,000/- under this head. For loss of consortium and loss of love and affection only an amount of Rs.5,000/- each has been awarded. We are satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that an amount of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively can be awarded under these heads. 4. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled to a further amount of Rs.97,000/- more in addition to the amounts already awarded as per the details shown below: M.A.C.A. No. 1595 of 2006 -: 4 :- 1. For loss of consortium - Rs.15,000/- more (Rs.20,000/- minus Rs.5,000/-) 2. For loss of love and affection - Rs.10,000/- more (Rs.15,000/- minus Rs.5,000/-) 3. For loss of dependency - Rs.72,000/- (2000 x 12 x 2/3 x 18) = Rs.2,88,000/- minus Rs.2,16,000/-) ----------------- Total - Rs.97,000/- ======= Interest shall be payable on the entire amount at the differential rates fixed by the Tribunal under the impugned award from the date of the petition. 5. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. R. BASANT (Judge) C.T. RAVIKUMAR (Judge) Nan/ M.A.C.A. No. 1595 of 2006 -: 5 :-