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 23RD JUNE 2011 / 2ND ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 2667 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.1473/2008 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS -------------- 1. PUTHIYOTTIL KUNHIRAMAN, S/O KANARAN PUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE, IRINGANNUR P.O. THUNERI VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 2. PUTHIYOTTIL PARU, W/O KUNHIRAMAN RESIDING - DO - 3. PUTHIYOTTIL VIJINA, D/O KUNHIRAMAN - DO- BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. K.P.USMAN, S/O MAJEED KUVERI PAIKAT SAJIRA MANZIL MOTEMMAL, MADATHUM BHAGAM PARAKKETTU VADAKKUMBAD, THALASSERY 2. SMT.M.PATHOOTTY, W/O C.K.MOOIDU RAHIYANATH MANZIL, VADAKKUMBAD THALASSERY 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR ADV. SRI.NAVEEN.T FOR R2 SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No. 2667 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)1473/2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery. They are the parents and sister of deceased Manoj who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated September 14, 2007 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,92,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in that accident. 2. On May 30, 2002 at about 4 p.m., while the deceased was riding pillion in a motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-11/P 5114, he was knocked down by a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-13/G 2161 driven by the first respondent. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital on June 4, 2002. Alleging negligence against the driver of the bus, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the MACA.No.2667/2008 2 offending bus remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. This O.P. was tried along with other O.P.s filed by the other injured person and a common award was passed. PWs 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A28 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the bus and awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. 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 counsel for 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 driver of the bus is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are MACA.No.2667/2008 3 entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Loss of dependency - Rs.1,76,000/- Bystander expenses - Rs. 900/- Medical expenses - Rs. 3,145/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 2,000/- Loss of estate - Rs. 2,500/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 7,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of compensation for loss of dependency and on other heads. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- which works out to Rs. 24,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 16,000/- was taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 11 and awarded Rs. 1,76,000/- for the loss of dependency. The deceased was a coolie aged 27 earning Rs.10,000/- per month, according to the claimants. The accident happened in 2002. Therefore, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/- which comes to Rs. 36,000/- per annum. After MACA.No.2667/2008 4 deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 24,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants and the age of the deceased, we feel that a multiplier of 12 would be reasonable in this case. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 2,88,000/- ( 24,000 x 12). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,12,000/-. 10. No compensation is seen awarded for loss of love and affection. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants and the deceased, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 11. For the pain and suffering endured, Rs. 7,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal which appears to be quite inadequate. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 12. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded MACA.No.2667/2008 5 interest only @ 7% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. 13. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,30,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. The third 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 sv. MACA.No.2667/2008 6 MACA.No.2667/2008 7