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 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 MACA.No. 570 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.773/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA .................... APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS: ------------------------------------ 1. THANKAMONY, W/O. PEETHAMBARAN, AGED 44 YEARS, PALOTTUKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, PALOTTUVILA, MALAYINKIL VILLAGE, MALAYINKIL (MOTHER OF DECEASED AJAYA KUMAR). 2. PEETHAMBARAN, S/O. MADHAVA PANICKER, AGED 48 YEARS, PALOTTUKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, PALOTTUVILA, MALAYINKIL VILLAGE, MALAYINKIL (FATHER OF DECEASED AJAYA KUMAR). 3. SANDYARANI, D/O. PEETHAMBARAN, AGED 20 YEARS, PALOTTUKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, PALOTTUVILA, MALAYINKIL VILLAGE, MALAYINKIL (SISTER OF DECEASED AJAYA KUMAR). BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (OWNER OF OFFENDING K.S.R.T.C. BUS NO.TA.265-KL-15/1300). 2. C.WILFRED, S/O. CHELLAYAN, PENAMEDUKUZHI VEEDU, VALANGAMURI, NEYYATTINKARA (NOW WORKING AS DRIVER, K.S.R.T.C. PARASSALA DEPOT DRIVER OF OFFENDING K.S.R.T.C. BUS NO.T.A.265- KL-15/1300). ADV. SRI.T.RAVIKUMAR, SC, KSRTC FOR R1 SHRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.570 OF 2003 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.773/2001 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated March 5, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 2,30,948/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Ajayakumar in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : Deceased Ajayakumar was aged 22 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs. 3,600/- per month as a Workshop Mechanic, according to the claimants. On June 14, 2001, the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KRT-7745 from his workshop to Palottuvila junction. When he reached near Malayinkil junction, a KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KL-15-1300 driven by the second respondent came at a high speed from the opposite side and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. Deceased sustained very MACA.No.570/2003 2 serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram on the next day. Claimants are the parents and sister of the deceased. They are the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. Claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 7 lakhs. 3. First respondent, the Managing Director of KSRTC filed a written statement before the Tribunal admitting the accident, but contending that there was no negligence on the part of the second respondent. Second respondent did not file any separate written statement. 4. Exts.A1 to A6 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence awarded a compensation of Rs. 2,30,948/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate costs. The claimants have MACA.No.570/2003 3 now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the standing counsel for the KSRTC. 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, the driver of the offending bus 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.2,30,948/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Loss of dependency - Rs. 1,88,448/- Loss of love and affection - Rs. 15,000/- Loss of estate - Rs. 15,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 5,000/- Transportation - Rs. 2,000/- Damage to clothing - Rs. 500/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 5,000/- ---------------- Total - Rs. 2,30,948/- ========== 8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 2,000/- and after deducting 1/3 MACA.No.570/2003 4 for his personal expenses, took Rs.1334/- as his monthly contribution to his family which comes to Rs. 16,008/- annually. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 17. For the first 6 years, the above amount was taken as his yearly contribution to his family. But for the remaining 11 years, the contribution to his family was taken as Rs. 700/- per month on the ground that he would have married and his contribution to his family would have been reduced. 9. Ext.A6 is the certificate issued from one N.M.Two Wheeler Works, Pappanamcode stating that the deceased was working there as a Mechanic and used to earn Rs. 3,600/- per month. Though the person who issued Ext.A6 was not examined to prove the same, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably estimated at Rs. 2,500/- per month which comes to Rs. 30,000/- annually. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- can be taken as his yearly contribution to his family. The Tribunal took the multiplier of 17. Taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was aged 22 at the time of the accident and the mother, father and sister were aged 44, 48 and 20 respectively at the time of the accident, we are of the view that the multiplier adopted by MACA.No.570/2003 5 the Tribunal is reasonable. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,40,000/- ( Rs. 20,000/- x 17). Thus, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,51,552/- for the loss of dependency. 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 entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,51,552/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The first respondent being the owner 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.570/2003 6 MACA.No.570/2003 7