IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 1770 of 2006() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1048/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP.BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER 1 & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKAMANIAMMA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, W/O.RAMAN NAIR, PUNNIYATH HOUSE, P.O.CHITTANJOOR, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. 2. SMT.SAINABA MOHAMMED, KONDAPARATH HOUSE, NELLIKATTIL, P.O.KOTTANAD, PALAKKAD DIST. 3. K.K.SHAJIMON, S/O.KUNJIMON, KALATHIL NHALIL HOUSE, P.O.CHALISSERY, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR FOR R3 SRI.P.K.SAJEEV FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 1770 of 2006 ORDER ON I.A.NO.1994/2006 IN MACA NO.1770/2006 DISMISSED 25/11/2008. SD/- J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE SD/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.1770 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated 25th November, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant Insurance Company questions the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal contending that compensation awarded is highly excessive. A man aged 38 sustained injuries in a motor accident due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the appellant insurance company and succumbed to the injuries. He was unmarried. Mother was aged 65. The deceased had a brother and a sister. The Tribunal has taken 16 as the multiplier. It is well settled law that if the motor accident victim is unmarried, age of the claimants has to be looked into. Mother was the only dependent and, therefore, only five can be taken as multiplier. It was argued by the claimants that the brother of the deceased died during the pendency of the proceedings and his legal representatives were impleaded and if he were alive, he also would have supported them. Only five can be taken as multiplier because mother was aged 65 at the time of the accident. The Tribunal has fixed Rs.2,000/= as the monthly income. According to the claimants, the deceased was a tuition teacher conducting a tutorial college, but, no evidence was adduced to show the same. Ext.A7 is the Degree certificate. Even though insurance company contended that the deceased was mentally ill, he was a degree holder and there is no MACA.1770/2006 2 evidence that he had mental illness. Accident occurred on 30.1.2001. According to the claimants, the deceased was getting Rs.4,000/= as monthly income. It is also argued that since the amount awarded was just and reasonable, the claimants did not file any appeal. The deceased was a Degree holder and he died at the prime age of 38. In the circumstances, we fix Rs.3,000/= as monthly income. After deducting one third for personal expenses, Rs.2,000/= is fixed as the monthly loss of dependency. Therefore, yearly loss of dependency will be Rs.24,000/= and by taking five as multiplier, compensation payable will be Rs.1,20,000/=. Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,56,000/= and, therefore, compensation will be reduced by Rs.1,36,000/= and the total compensation payable will be Rs.1,66,500/= instead of Rs.3,02,500/=. The above amount of Rs.1,66,500/= should be deposited by the appellant insurance company with interest as awarded by the Tribunal, after deducting the amount already deposited. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE tks