IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 519 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.1162/1992 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS. ------------------------------------- 1. KURICHIKUNNEL ROSE, D/O.CHACKO, AGED 66 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 2. KURICHIKUNNEL MATHEW, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 47 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 3. KURINCHIKUNNEL CHACKO, S/O.JOSEPH, 45 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM 4. KURINCHIKUNNEL JOHNSON, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 39 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 5. KURINCHIKUNNEL LICY, D/O.JOSEPH, AGED 43 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 6. KURINCHIKUNNEL JAISON, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 35 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 7. KURINCHIKUNNEL JIMMY, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 29 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. 8. KURINCHIKKUNEL BIJU, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 24 YEARS, AYYANKUNNU AMSOM, ANGADIKKADAVU DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. CHANDRAN, S/O.BHASKARAN, PULIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANAPANTHY, ANGADIKKADVU (POST) IRRITTY. 2. MARIAM, W/O.JOSEPH, MANNAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHARAL (POST) IRITTY VIA. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., THALASSERY. 4. BENNY, S/O.JOSEPH 41 YEARS, KURINCHIKUNNEL HOUSE, ANGADIKKADAVU POST., IRIITTY VIA. 5. SHAJU, S/O.JOSEPH 37 YEARS, KURINCHIKUNNEL HOUSE, ANGADIKKADAVU POST, IRITTY VIA. 6. JOJAN, S/O.JOSEPH, 33 YEARS, KURINCHIKUNNEL HOUSE, ANGADIKKADAVU POST, IRITTY VIA. ADVS. SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH FOR R2 SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO.519 OF 2003 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the death of one Joseph, husband of the first appellant in a road accident. Appellants 2 to 8 and respondents 4 to 6 are the children of the deceased. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery awarded a total compensation of Rs.65,500/- to the first appellant, but did not grant any compensation to appellants 2 to 8 and respondents 4 to 6 as all of them had attained the age of majority when the award was passed. 2. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellants, Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company and Adv. Sri. K.K. Ravindranath appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 3. It is the case of the appellants that the Tribunal had taken the age of the deceased as 70 without any basis. Counsel appearing for the M.A.C.A. NO.519/2003 2 appellants contended that even though the deceased was about 60 years of age at the time of his death, he was earning income from agricultural operation and rubber tapping. Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that there is no proof of employment and income of the deceased and consequently, no enhancement is called for because the Tribunal has granted eligible compensation of Rs.50,000/- for non earning person. Even though there is no proof about the age of the deceased, there is nothing to indicate that he was an infirm person on account of old age and, therefore, he would have been able to earn some income at least for a few years because there is no dispute about the health condition of the deceased. It is seen that the accident occurred in the middle of the night when the deceased was travelling in a jeep which itself is indicative of his health condition. Besides claiming enhancement of compensation for loss of dependency, the appellants also submitted that the compensation granted for pain and suffering is too low, for the deceased was in the hospital for 22 days fighting for life. 4. Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that since there is no appeal by the Insurance Company, any enhancement of compensation granted by this Court should also be paid by the Insurance Company. Considering the claim of the appellants and the contention of M.A.C.A. NO.519/2003 3 the respondents, we enhance the total compensation from Rs.65,500/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. 5. Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that interest has not been granted by the Tribunal for ten years for the reason that the claim petition remained dismissed for default and was restored only after ten years. However, it is seen from the copy of the affidavit that the first application for restoration was filed in 1993 within three years of dismissal of the claim petition for default and another one is seen filed in 1995. So, there is no justification in declining interest. In the circumstances, we direct the Insurance Company to deposit the additional compensation and interest on entire compensation awarded at the rate of 7 1/2 % per annum from the date of claim application till date of payment. The appeal is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ M.A.C.A. NO.519/2003 4 C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO. 519/2003 JUDGMENT 13th October, 2008 M.A.C.A. NO.519/2003 5