IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 1710 of 2007(F) ------------------------------------- (O.P(MV).NO.2853/2000 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR) .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------ 1. BINDU MURALEEDHARAN, W/O. LATE MURALEEDHARAN, ADATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PURANATTUKKARA P.O., THRISSUR. 2. ADARSH, MINOR, S/O. LATE MURALEEDHARAN, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT, -DO- -DO- 3. ATHIRA, MINOR, D/O. LATE MURALEEDHARAN, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT, -DO- -DO- 4. MADHAVI, W/O. LATE GOPALAN, ADATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PURANATTUKARA P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. JERALD PAUL, S/O. PAUL, MOYALAN HOUSE, KALLOOR P.O., THRISSUR. 2. LONAPPAN @ JOY, S/O. RAPPAI, PARAYIL HOUSE, KOZHUKULLY P.O., THRISSUR. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR. POLICY NO.31/760301/33092. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No. 1710 of 2007 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimants in O.P.(MV) No.2853 of 2000 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated April 5, 2006, awarding a compensation of Rs.9,64,900/- for the loss caused to them, on account of the death of Muraleedharan in a motor accident. 2. Muraleedharan has filed the claim petition for the loss caused to him, on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. Subsequently, he died. His wife and children were impleaded as claimants 2 to 4 and his mother was impleaded as fifth claimant. The claim petition was amended, claiming a compensation for the loss caused to them on account of death of Muraleedharan in the accident. 3. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- MACA 1710/2007 2 On March 17, 2000 at about 8.15 p.m. Muraleedharan was standing with his bicycle on the side of Thrisur-Kunnamkulam public road. At that time a bus bearing registration No. KL-8H 3744 came at a high speed and knocked him down. He sustained very serious injuries. Subsequently, he died while undergoing treatment in the hospital on January 17, 2002. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by the second respondent. The first respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severely liable to pay the compensation to the claimants, who are the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased. The claimants claimed compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. 4. Respondents 1 and 2, owner and driver of the offending bus, remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, insurer of the offending bus, filed a written statement, admitting the policy and further contending that the claimants have to prove that MACA 1710/2007 3 Muraleedharan died, as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident. 5. PW.1 was examined and Exts. A1 to A17 and X1 and X2 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. On the side of the contesting third respondent, Ext.B1 was marked. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent, driver of the offending bus, that Muraleedharan died as a result of the injuries sustained and awarded a compensation of Rs.9,64,900/- with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimants have come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent and that Muraleedharan MACA 1710/2007 4 died as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident are not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation ? 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.9,64,900/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of earnings : Rs.35,000/- Transportation expenses : Rs.5,000/- Extra nourishment : Rs.5,000/- Funeral expenses : Rs.5,000/- Damage to clothing : Rs.500/- Medical expenses : Rs.1,19,400/- Personal assistance : Rs.15,000/- Pain and suffering : Rs.40,000/- Loss of consortium : Rs.25,000/- Loss of love and affection : Rs.25,000/- Loss of estate : Rs.10,000/- Loss of dependency : Rs.6,80,000/- ------------------ Total : Rs.9,64,900/- ======== 9. The learned counsel for the appellants mainly sought enhancement of compensation for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.5,000/-, after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, took MACA 1710/2007 5 Rs.40,000/- per annum as his contribution to the family . The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded a compensation of Rs.6,80,000/- for loss of dependency. 10. The deceased was aged 35 at the time of the accident, which is not seriously disputed. Exts.A9, A10 and A11 would show that he was getting a considerable income from textile business. Ext.A9 is a copy of policy certificate. Exts.P10 is a copy of “Nithya Nithi” deposit maintained by the deceased in Adat Farmers' Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. It is seen from Exts.A10 and A11 that he used to deposit Rs.1,500/- to Rs.2,000/- per month in those deposits. Ext.A12 shows that there were 12 fixed deposit in the said bank in the name of the deceased. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.7,000/-, which works out Rs.84,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, a balance amount of Rs.56,000/- can be treated as his contribution to his family. The Tribunal took multiplier as 17, which is not seriously disputed. Thus, compensation for the loss of MACA 1710/2007 6 dependency, the claimants are entitled to Rs.9,52,000/-. Thus, on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,72,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 11. In the result, the claimants 2 to 4 are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,72,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The third respondent Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimants. The award of the Tribunal is modified as found above. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.