IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1256 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.760/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------------------ THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS AND 1ST RESPONDENT IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------------------------- 1. AZHUVATH PATHUMA, W/O.MOIDEEN, KOZHIKKAL HOUSE, THENNALA AMSOM, VALAKKULAM, P.O.KOZHICHINA, VIA KOTTAKKAL. 2. K.MOOSA, KOZHIKKAL HOUSE, THENNALA AMSOM, P.O.VALAKKULAM, KOZHICHIRA, VIA, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. K.BASHEER, DO.DO. 4. K.BUSHARA, DO.DO. 5. K.CHACKO, S/O. UTHUP, KSRTC BUS DRIVER, PAINGADIL HOUSE VALLIMADUKUNNU P.O., CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR FOR R1 TO 4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008 ALONG WITH MACA 1259/2005 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVEREDTHE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1256 & 1259 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Both the connected appeals are filed by KSRTC challenging the award passed granting compensation for the death of two brothers in the same accident. Counsel for the KSRTC submitted that accident is on account of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, one of whom was driving the bike. However, we do not find any justification to interfere with the award because there is no positive evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the victims. Besides this KSRTC driver stood charge-sheeted for rash and negligent driving. 2. The next contest is with regard to amount of compensation awarded in both the cases. Counsel for KSRTC submitted that there is no evidence about qualification, business and income of the deceased and inspite of the same, MACT has adopted Rs. 3500/- as monthly income in one case and Rs. 2000/- in the other case. We do not find any ground to interfere because the income fixed is very low in absolute terms. However, we feel correction is required with regard to multiplier adopted in M.A.C.A.No.1259 of 2005. Considering the age 2 of the deceased, who was 37 years, even according to Claim Petition, multiplier should have been 16 as against 17 applied by MACT. This will entitle the KSRTC for reduction of compensation by Rs. 27,600/- with proportionate interest thereon. We allow appeal No. 1259 of 2005 by directing the KSRTC to deposit the compensation awarded reduced by Rs. 27,600/- with proportionate interest thereon. No other modification is called for in the award in O.P.No. 745 of 1997. 3. So far as M.A.C.A.No. 1256 of 2005 is concerned, we notice that income fixed is only Rs. 2000/- per month and the compensation for loss of dependancy is worked out with regard to age of the claimant. We therefore do not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by MACT. This appeal stands dismissed in toto. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (HARUN-UL-RASHID) Judge. kk 3