IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 971 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.324/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. ELSY, W/O.CHATHELY PAULOSE, CHATHELY HOUSE, VALLIKULANGARA P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. BINDU C.P., D/O.LATE CHATHELY PAULOSE, CHATHELY HOUSE, VALLIKULANGARA P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. BEENA C.P., D/O.LATE CHATHELY PAULOSE, CHATHELY HOUSE, VALLIKULANGARA P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. MERCY BABY, W/O.BABY, NEYYAN HOUSE, KORATTY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. RAVI P.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN, PAYYAPILLY HOUSE, KOOVAKATTUKUNNU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., CHALAKUDY. ADV. SRI.R.KIRAN FOR R1 & R2 SRI.VPK.PANICKER FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.971 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.324/1998 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated November 28, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,98,900/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Baiju in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : The deceased Baiju was aged 24 at the time of accident and used to earn Rs. 3,000/- per month by conducting a travel agency by name M/s. Sangeetha Travels at Vellikulangara. Claimants are the mother and sisters of the deceased. On November 6, 1997 at about 3.15 p.m, the deceased was riding his scooter bearing Reg.No. KL-8/J 595 along National Highway 47. When he reached at Mamangalam near Palarivattom, a lorry bearing Reg.No.KCF 365 driven by second respondent came at a high speed and dashed against the scooter of the MACA.No.971/2004 2 deceased. Deceased sustained serious injuries and he died on the spot. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the dependents and legal heirs of the deceased. The claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending lorry remained absent and were set ex-parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent the insurer of the offending lorry filed a written statement admitting the policy and further contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,67,700/- with MACA.No.971/2004 3 interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,67,700/- ( mistakenly noted as Rs. 1,98,900/-). The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of dependency - Rs. 1,63,200/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 2,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 2,500/- 8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of compensation for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 1,200/- and after deducting 1/3 towards his personal expenses, his contribution to the family was taken MACA.No.971/2004 4 as Rs. 800/- and adopted a multiplier of 17 as the deceased was aged 25 at the time of the accident and awarded Rs. 1,63,200/- for the loss of dependency.Counsel for the claimants submitted that as the deceased was conducting a travel agency and earning more than Rs. 3,000/- per month, the monthly income of the deceased taken by the Tribunal is very low. 9. There is force in the above submission. Ext.A9 is the certificate issued by the President of Mattathur Grama Panchayath certifying that the deceased Baiju was running Sangeetha Travels in Mattathur panchayath. Ext.A10 is the certificate of the Manager, Blue Sky Travels certifying that the deceased was conducting a travel agency by name M/s. Sangeetha Travels. Ext.A11 series are certain receipts issued to the deceased by Blue Sky Travels. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably estimated at Rs. 2,500/- which works out to Rs. 30,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- per annum can be taken as his contribution to the family. As the deceased was aged 25 at the time of the accident, the proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case as MACA.No.971/2004 5 per the Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act is 18. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,60,000/- ( 20,000 x 18). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,96,800/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 10. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,96,800/-. The award of the Tribunal is corrected as Rs. 1,67,700/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.971/2004 6 MACA.No.971/2004 7