IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 MFA.No. 274 of 2001() -------------------------------- OP.(MV).650/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANTS PETITIONES IN OP(MV) ---------------------- 1. FANCIS SIMETHY, KAVALAMPAAMBIL HOUSE, KADUKUTTY DESOM P.O., KALLUR VADAKKUMMURY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. RAJINA, W/O. FRANCIS SIMETHY, DO. DO. 3. REENA SIMETHY, D/O. FRANCIS SIMETHY, DO. DO. 4. SHERISON SIMETHY, S/O. DO. DO. 5. MARY RAMYA SIMETHY, D/O. DO. (MINOR ) AGED 17 YEARS. (MINOR REP.BY NEXT FRIEND AND GUARDIAN MOTHER RAJINA). BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ----------------------- 1. K.N.RAGHAVAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, SANTHINIKETAN, CHIRACKAL, KANNUR. 2. ANTOO, S/O. ANTHONY, KARAYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, VE;;ANHIRA, ALOOR P.O. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., THRISSUR. R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.D.PANICKER SMT.JEENA JOSEPH R3 BY SRI.M.A.HAKIM SHAH THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. Koshy & K.Hema, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.F.A.No. 274 of 2001 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. A 22 year old young man sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident on 5.5.1996. While he was driving an autorickshaw, a lorry driven by the second respondent, owned by the first respondent and insured by the third respondent hit the autorickshaw. His dependents, father, mother and two sisters and one brother together, filed application for compensation claiming an amount of Rs.4,56,500/-. The tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.1,26,500/- with interest and cost. After finding that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent and the offending vehicle was covered by valid insurance policy issued by the third respondent insurance company. The only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. 2. It is the contention of the claimant that the deceased was the eldest son and he was the only earning member of the family. His two sisters and one brother were minor at the time of accident and he was maintaining the family. His young sisters were M.F.A.No.274/2001 2 also expecting his help at the time of their marriage. The tribunal has fixed only Rs.1,500/- as the monthly income. He was a professional autorickshaw driver. He was having proper driving licence with badge. The claimants also produced a salary certificate stating that the deceased was getting a monthly salary of Rs.3,000/-. According to the claimants, apart from the above, he was getting batta. In any event, he was an autorickshaw driver by profession. The accident occurred when he was driving the autorickshaw. An autorickshaw driver will get at least Rs.100/- per day during the year 1996 and will get 25 to 26 days' work in a month and thus he will get more than Rs.2,500/- per month. After deducting one-third for personal expenses, the monthly loss of dependency to the family is Rs.1,650/-. The tribunal has taken only 13 as the multiplier taking the age of the claimants. We see no ground to increase the same as the claimant was an unmarried person. Therefore, compensation payable for loss of dependency will be Rs.1650 x 12 x 13 = Rs.2,57,400/-. The tribunal has granted only Rs.One lakh towards contribution to the family. It is now settled law that compensation has to be calculated on a multiplier method taking second schedule as a guideline. M.F.A.No.274/2001 3 3. A three member bench of the Supreme Court in Smt.Supe Dei and others v. M/s.National Insurance Company Ltd.and another (JT 2002 (Suppl.1) SC 451), held that the second schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act is framed for the purpose of awarding compensation under section 163-A, but, it serves as a guideline for determination of compensation under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Since the victim of the accident in that case was aged 32, considering the second schedule, Hon'ble Supreme Court accepted 17 as the multiplier. In United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Patricia Jean Mahajan and others (JT 2002 (5) SC 74), the Apex Court held that, except in very rare cases, multiplier system should not be deviated from. The other methods, which were in vogue prior to the introduction of the multiplier system, were held to be no more good system. It was further held that normally the multiplier, as indicated in the second schedule, should be applied. Though the second schedule is found to be a safe guide for the purpose of calculation of the amount of compensation, in special circumstances, it can be varied. In that case, it was also held that if the multiplicand is very high, a lesser multiplier can be taken. In Abati Bezbaruah v. Dy. Director General, Geological Survey of India and another ((2003) 3 SCC 148), it was held that structured formula M.F.A.No.274/2001 4 mentioned in the second schedule gives guidelines for determination of the amount of compensation in terms of section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Deviation from the structured formula can be resorted to only in exceptional cases and ordinarily the above multiplier system should be followed. Here, since the deceased was unmarried, age of the parents were taken for finding the multiplier. Therefore, claimants are entitled to Rs.1,57,400/- as additional compensation over and above the amount decreed by the tribunal. The above amount of Rs.1,57,400/- should be deposited by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5 % interest from the date of application till its deposit. Since the accident occurred in 1996 and since minor sisters were married by now, the additional compensation now directed can be withdrawn by appellants 1 and 2, parents of the deceased. J.B.Koshy Judge K. Hema Judge vaa M.F.A.No.274/2001 5 M.F.A.No.274/2001 6 J.B. KOSHY AND K.HEMA,JJ. ------------------------------------- M.F.A. No. 274 of 2001 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:9th January, 2008