IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 1900 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.1003/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. ABDURAHIMAN, 42 YEARS, S/O.KUNHEEDU, KAMBRAN HOUSE, KAKKADAMPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. KHADEEJA, 38 YEARS, W/O.ABDURAHIMAN, KAMBRAN HOUSE, KAKKADAMPURAM P.O., A.R.NAGAR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SHIHABUDHEEN, S/O.UNNIMOIDEEN HAJI, KODAPPANAKKAD HOUSE, OZHUKUR, MALAPPURAM (DRIVER). 2. KOTTAYI UNNIMOIDEEN HAJI, S/O.MAMMAD, KODAPPANAKKAD HOUSE, P.O.OZHUKUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT (OWNER). 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., MANJERI. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * M.A.C.A.No.1900 of 2006 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of February 2009 J U D G M E N T BASANT,J The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. They claim an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation for the loss suffered on account of the death of their only son in a motor accident which took place on 28/8/2001. The deceased aged 18 years was claimed to be employed as a coolie earning a monthly income of Rs.3,000/-. He succumbed to the injuries on the next day after the incident. The first claimant examined himself as PW1. Exts.A1 to A3 were marked. The Tribunal, taking into consideration all the relevant circumstances, sailed to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled for an amount of Rs.1,75,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum and cost as directed. The appellants claimed to be aggrieved by the impugned award. 2. What is the grievance? Called upon to explain the precise nature of challenge which the learned counsel for the appellants wants to mount against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellants first of all points out that M.A.C.A.No.1900/06 2 there has been a total omission to award any amount under the head loss of love and affection. The learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the monthly income was reckoned unreasonably at Rs.1,250/- per mensum in 2001. The learned counsel points out that even in 1994, the Legislature has permitted the Tribunals to draw the presumption of prudence that even a non-earning person can be assumed to earn an income of Rs.1,250/- per mensum . In these circumstances, the multiplicand adopted to ascertain the loss of dependency is perversely and painfully low, it is contended. 3. We are satisfied, considering the totality of inputs that it was only an inadvertent omission to award amounts under the head loss of love and affection. Award of an amount of Rs.10,000/- under this head will be perfectly justified, we are satisfied. 4. We do further find merit in the contention that a higher amount could have been taken as the multiplicand. In the absence of better evidence, we come to the conclusion that Rs.18,000/- per annum i.e. Rs.1,500/- per mensum can reasonably be reckoned as the quantum of monthly earnings. Giving due regard to the fact that the deceased may have got married later and the contribution to the parents may have M.A.C.A.No.1900/06 3 fluctuated, under the head of loss of dependency, we are satisfied that a further amount of Rs.32,000/- [(18,000 x 2/3 x 16) minus 15,000 x 2/3 x 16)] can be awarded. 5. The learned counsel finally contends that the award of interest @ 6% per annum is not realistic and reasonable. Interest must have been awarded at least @ 7.5% per annum, contends the counsel with the help of precedents. We are satisfied that the said request can be accepted. 6. In the result, a) This M.A.C.A is allowed in part. b) The third respondent is directed to pay a further amount of Rs.42,000/- (Rupees forty two thousand only) in addition to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal. Interest shall be payable on the entire amount @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition. The direction for payment of cost and the directions for disbursal are upheld. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jsr M.A.C.A.No.1900/06 4 M.A.C.A.No.1900/06 5 R.BASANT &C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 06/02/2009