IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 MACA.No. 1546 of 2006(A) ------------------------------------- OP(MV).NO.159/1997 OF II ADDL. M.A.C.T., KOZHIKODE. .................... APPELLANTS/ PETITIONER: ---------------------------------------- 1. MALUKKUTTY.C.P., W/O.LATE BALAN.C.P., CHALILPURAYIL HOUSE, PAINGOTTUPURAM, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, (WIFE OF THE DECEASED). 2. MINEESH.C.P., S/O.LATE C.P.BALAN, CHALILPURAYIL HOUSE, PAINGOTTUPURAM, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, (SON OF THE DECEASED). 3. MINIJA.C.P., D/O.LATE C.P.BALAN, CHALILPURAYIL HOUSE, PAINGOTTUPURAM, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, (DAUGHTER OF THE DECEASED). BY ADV. MR.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, MR.C.S.SUNIL, SMT.C.G.PREETHA, MR.M.PRAVEESH. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. M.GOPALAN NAIR, S/O.CHANDUKUTTY NAIR, `DEVAKI NIVAS', VELLIPARAMBA, KUTTIKKATTOOR AMSOM, VELLIPARAMBA, CALICUT, (R.C.OWNER OF BUS NO.KRM 1027). 2. KUZHIKADATH SIDDIQUE, S/O.MAMMADKOYA, EKAROOL, UNNIKKULAM AMSOM DESOM, CALICUT, (DRIVER OF THE BUS NO.KRM 1027, D.L.NO.2541/94, BADGE NO.1362/94). 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CALICUT BRANCH III, TRIPURI BUILDING, EAST NADAKKAVU, CALICUT, (POLICY NO.760603/31/ 96/74344, CERTIFICATE NO.724/00000. R3 BY MR. MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.P.JACOB MATHEW. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.N.Ramachandran Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. =================================== M.A.C.A.No.1546 of 2006 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation for the death of husband of the first appellant who was the father of the remaining appellants. The accident is admitted and only the quantum of liability is disputed by the Insurance Company. Therefore the dispute is limited to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned standing counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants pointed out that the income taken as Rs.1,500/- per month is very low because the deceased was an experienced Mason and working on daily wages in a town. The appellants claimed Rs.4,000/- as his monthly income, which to our mind is on the higher side. In any case, we feel that at least Rs.3,000/- should be fixed as monthly income because Masons are in great demand over a decade now. Though we feel that the contentions of the Insurance Company that the multiplier adopted is high, in view of the age of the deceased, the multiplier can be adopted as 11. Applying MACA 1546/06 -: 2 :- this multiplier and the monthly income of Rs.2,000/- after deducting Rs.1,000/- towards personal expenses for the deceased, the appellants will be entitled to compensation for loss of dependency at Rs.2,65,000/- as against Rs.1,56,000/-. Considering the fact that the deceased has a wife, unmarried daughter and son, we enhance the compensation for loss of consortium and for loss of love and affection by a further sum of Rs.15,000/-. No other modification is called for in this case. The additional compensation of Rs.1,24,000/- granted by us will carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till date of deposit. The appeal stands allowed to the above extent. C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 13/1