IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 MACA.No. 1148 of 2011 ----------------------- OPMV.451/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT : 3RD RESPONDENT -------------- THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., POLLACHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, OMANA BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS : CLAIMANTS --------------- 1. CHAMIKUTTAN, KARYANDAM HOUSE, PPUZHAKKALTHARA, KOLLENGODE.P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 560. 2. LAKSHMI, W/O.CHAMIKUTTAN, KARYANDAM HOSUE, PUZHAKKALTHARA, KOLLENGODE.P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PIN-678 560. 3. BHAVADAS, KARYANDAM HOUSE, PUZHAKKALTHARA, KOLLENGODE.P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PIN-678 560. 4. MONISHA, KARYANDAM HOUSE, PUZHAKKALTHARA, KOLLENGODE.P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PIN-678 560. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. *********************** C.M.Appl.No.1749 of 2011 & M.A.C.A No.1148 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 ORDER/JUDGMENT BASANT, J. C.M.Appl.No.1749 of 2011 is to condone the delay of 262 days in filing an appeal. We are not satisfied that sufficient reason are shown to exist. It is fairly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant that another appeal against the common award has been dismissed by this Court in M.A.C.A No.827 of 2011, holding that the delay is not liable to be condoned and that the rejection of the prayer for condonation of delay does not result in any miscarriage of justice. 2. We have been taken through the amounts awarded. A total amount of Rs.3,84,000/- has been awarded as compensation. Deceased was a young man, aged 22 years. His parents are the claimants. Compensation for loss of dependency was computed taking Rs.2,000/- as the monthly income and 15 as the multiplier. 1/3 alone was deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 3. The Tribunal had found that the appellant is liable to C.M.Appl.No.1749 of 2011 & M.A.C.A No.1148 of 2011 2 pay only 70% of the compensation amount. Before us, the challenge is only against the quantum of compensation awarded. In particular the learned counsel for the appellant points out that the quantum of compensation awarded under the head of loss of dependency and the quantum of compensation awarded under the head of mental shock and agony are not justified. We have considered these contentions carefully. We note that only Rs.3,000/- has been reckoned as the monthly income of the 22 year old deceased person. 1/3 has been deducted towards the personal expenses. Following the dictum in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC 121], it is possible to contend that half the amount must be deducted towards his personal expenses. But we must note that only Rs.2,000/- has been reckoned as the monthly income and no provision has been made for future increase in prospects. At any rate, we are of the opinion that the total amount of Rs.3,84,000/- fixed as the loss suffered by the claimants is absolutely fair, reasonable and just. We are not in any way persuaded to invoke our appellate jurisdiction under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act to interfere with the total quantum of compensation awarded. C.M.Appl.No.1749 of 2011 & M.A.C.A No.1148 of 2011 3 4. We therefore take the view that there is no satisfactory reason to condone the delay. We further conclude that the rejection of the prayer for condonation of the delay does not result in any miscarriage of justice. 5. In the result: a) C.M.Appl.No.1749 of 2011 is, in these circumstances, dismissed; b) Consequently the appeal shall stand rejected as barred by limitation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) rtr/