IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 180 of 2004() -------------------------------- OPMV.1210/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS & LEGAL HEIR OF 4TH PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.A.PAREETH S/O. ABDULLA NEELOO VEETTIL, CHANDOIROOR P.O. 2. DEELNA MOL D/O. N.A.PAREETH (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER N.A.PAREETH, RESIDING AT -DO.DO.- 3. NASSIF S/O. N.A.PAREETH (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER N.A.PAREETH, RESIDING AT -DO.DO.- 4. KHADEEJA BEEVI W/O. V.A.IBRAHIM, PUTHENPURAIL VEEDU, PALLANA, THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMMED RESPONDENTS /RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SASIKUMAR S/O. SHANKARAPPILLAI SHYAMALA MANDIRAM MOULUM MAKA DESHAM, WARD NO.VIII CHONKAL PANCHAYATH, NEYYATTINKARA. ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K GOPAL,SC KSRTC FOR R1 SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== M.A.C.A.No.180 of 2004 ===================== Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy,J. The wife of the first appellant died and the first appellant sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident on 2.3.1995. The husband, two children and parents approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for compensation of Rs. 6.78 lakhs. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent driver of the vehicle owned by the first respondent. The Tribunal awarded only a total amount of Rs.2,56,000/- with interest from the date of application till realisation. The only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. 2. According to the claimants, the deceased was 27 years old and she was engaged as a Supervisor in a prawn peeling shed and she was getting a monthly income of Rs.3,000/-. They also produced an income certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Cherthala to show that she had a monthly income of Rs.3,000/-. Even though it is the summary proceedings, the Tribunal did not accept the certificate on the ground that the Tahsildar who issued the certificate, was not examined. The learned counsel also pointed that in Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others - 2001 (8) S.C.C. 197 the Supreme Court held that even the services of a house wife who is a non-earning member can be valued MACA 180/04 -: 2 :- at Rs.3,000/- per month. But the Tribunal only took Rs.1,500/- as the monthly income. Services of the house wife cannot be underestimated or cannot be treated as valueless. Two young children lost their mother. Here she was also employed in a peeling shed. We are of the view she would have got at least Rs.100/- per day and she would have got 24 days work in a month and so she would be getting a minimum Rs.2,400/- per month. She was 27 years old. The Tribunal has taken 18 as the multiplier. Even though the appellants contended that in view of the increase in the average age, a higher multiplier should be taken, taking the guidance from the 2nd Schedule, we are of the opinion that the multiplier need not be enhanced. After deducting 1/3rd of the income for her personal expenses, the compensation payable will be Rs.1600x12x18 = Rs.3,45,600/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,56,000/-. So, additional compensation payable will be Rs.1,29,600/-. Even though it is contended that the compensation claimed under other heads are very low, we are not enhancing the same considering the total amount awarded. 3. The above additional compensation of Rs.1,29,600/- should be deposited by the first respondent - Corporation over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal with the same rate of interest as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of application till its deposit. From the additional amount of Rs.10,000/- is allowed to be withdrawn by the 4th appellant. Out of the balance amount, 1/3rd is allowed to be MACA 180/04 -: 3 :- withdrawn by the first appellant husband. The balance shall be deposited in a Nationalised Bank equally in the names of the 2nd and 3rd appellants (children) enabling them to withdraw the amount when they attain the age of 21 or at the time of their marriage whichever is earlier. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 18/7