IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 12TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 808 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.3617/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------ 1. DEVAKI, W/O. BALAN, THOOYATH HOUSE, P.O. KALLETTUMKARA, VALLAKKUNNU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. MINI MOL, D/O. BALAN, THOOYATH HOUSE, P.O. KALLETTUMKARA, VALLAKKUNNU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. AJITHA, D/O. BALAN, THOOYATH HOUSE, P.O. KALLETTUMKARA, VALLAKKUNNU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. VINI M.B., D/O. LATE VIJI, MEPPURATH HOUSE, P.O. ENAMACKAL, THRISSUR. 5. VINEETH, S/O. LATE VIJI, MEPPURATH HOUSE, P.O. ENAMACKAL, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.SREEKANTH.K.R RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. SHAIJU P. DEVASSY, PLASSERY HOUSE, P.O. KORATTY WEST,THIRUMUDIKKUNNU. 2. T.I. FRANCIS, S/O. T.E. LAWRENCE, 1/13, IYYAPPAN COLONY, GURUNCY, COONOOR, THE NILGIRIS. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., B.O. CITY HEIGHTS BUILDINGS, CHALAKUDY. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR FOR R2 SRI.P.M.BENSON FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MACA.No. 808 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of February, 2011 Judgment Basheer, J: This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Moor Vehicles Act seeking compensation for the death of one Balan, the husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellants 2 and 3. The other appellants are stated to be the grand children of the deceased. 2. The Tribunal passed the impugned award directing the Insurance Company to pay a total sum of Rs.2,97,300/- with 7% interest. Appellants challenge the quantum of compensation awarded in this appeal. 3. When this appeal was taken up for consideration on the last occasion, it was brought to our notice that the Tribunal had subsequently reviewed the award and in fact reduced the quantum of compensation to Rs.2,37,300/- from Rs.2,97,300/-. Since learned counsel for the appellants was not in a position to enlighten us about the reviewed award we had called for the records from the Tribunal. MACA.808/2006. : 2 : 4. It is seen from the records that the Tribunal has reviewed and modified the award. The compensation reckoned by the Tribunal as Rs.2,08,000/- under the head of loss of dependency is seen to have been reduced and refixed as Rs.1,48,000/-. What has prompted the Tribunal to refix the compensation is the age of the deceased as mentioned in the Postmortem certificate. Consequently reduction is reflected in the total amount of compensation also, thereby bringing down the total amount from Rs.2,97,300/- to Rs.2,37,000. 5. While reviewing the award the Tribunal has proceeded to reckon the age of the deceased as 58 on the basis of the age indicated in the post mortem certificate. But Pw.1, the widow of the deceased victim had asserted in her deposition while she was examined as Pw.1 that the deceased was not aged 57/58 at the time of his death. According to her, she was aged 45 at that time. She had produced her voter's identity card in corroboration. In the Claim Petition the age of the deceased was shown as 50. The above assertion made by Pw.1 stood uncontroverted. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal ought not to have taken the age of the deceased as 58 solely on the basis of the entry seen to have been made in the post mortem certificate. It is also not clear from the award what was the MACA.808/2006. : 3 : monthly income reckoned by the Tribunal while calculating the loss of dependency. 6. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the award passed by the Tribunal after review can be modified. The monthly income of the deceased is taken as Rs.3,000/- since it is not in dispute that he was a construction worker at the time of his death. In our view, a multiplier of 11 would be just and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore the compensation payable under the head of loss of dependency is calculated as hereunder: 3000 X 12 X 2/3 X 11 = 2,64,000/- In all other respects the award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed. However appellant shall be entitled to get interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realisation on the entire amount of compensation. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali an. Judge.