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 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 1911 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.296/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. JEESHA, W/O.LATE JOHNSON, RESIDING AT PUTHENKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOODALAPPATTU KARA, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 2. IRIN, D/O.LATE JOHNSON, AGED 7 YEARS (MINOR), PUTHENKUDIYIL HOUSE, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER JEESHA, W/O.LATE JOHNSON, PUTHENKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOODALIPPATTU KARA, KOOVAPADY AS NEXT FRIEND. 3. MERIN, D/O.LATE JOHNSON, AGED 4 1/2 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER JEESHA, W/O.LATE JOHNSON, PUTHENKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOODALIPPATTU KARA, KOOVAPPADY AS NEXT FRIEND. BY ADV. SMT.ANNIE PAUL SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOHN, S/O.JOSEPH, KOIKKAMOLETH HOUSE, CHITTANATTU KARA, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE. 2. JINU, S/O.VARGHESE, RESIDING AT MUNDAN HOUSE, MORAKALA KARA, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, ORISON COMPLEX, WADAKKANCHERRY ROAD, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE. 4. P.S.OUSEPH, S/O.SOURU, RESIDING AT PUTHENKUDY HOUSE, EDACHIRA.P.O, THENGODE. 5. NATIONAL INSURACNE COMPANY LTD., P.B.NO.24, MULLAPPADY BUILDINGS, A.M.ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR. Addl. 6. SOURU, S/O. OUSEPH, PUTHENKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU. 7. THRESIA, W/O. SOURU, DO. DO. DO. ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE FOR R5 SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No. 1911 of 2005 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 26th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV) No.296 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha. They are the wife and two minor children of deceased Johnson who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated April 7, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.6,11,000/- (mistakenly noted as Rs.6,10,000/- by the Tribunal) for the loss caused to them on account of the death of Johnson in that accident. 2. The accident happened on August 2, 2000 at Koothattukulam. While deceased Johnson was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No.KL7V/2296 along M.C.Road he was knocked down by a bus bearing registration No.KL-7K/1611 driven by the 1st respondent. Johnson as well as pillion rider Shijo Baby died in the MACA 1911/2005 2 accident. Alleging negligence against the 1st respondent driver of the bus, the claimants filed the Original Petition before the Tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the offending bus and 4th respondent, the owner of the motor cycle, remained absent before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending bus, and 5th respondent, insurer of the motor cycle, filed separate written statements admitting the policies of the respective vehicles. 4. This Original Petition was jointly tried by the Tribunal along with O.P.No.1681 of 2000 filed by legal heirs of deceased Shijo Baby and a common award was passed. 5. Exts. A1 to A17 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent, the driver of the offending bus and awarded a MACA 1911/2005 3 compensation of Rs.6,10,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization against respondents 1 to 3. The claimants have come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 5, the Insurance Companies. 7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st 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 ? 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,10,000/-. Actually the total compensation comes to Rs.6,11,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- MACA 1911/2005 4 Loss of dependency : Rs. 5,44,000/- Transportation : Rs. 500/- Damage to clothing : Rs. 1,500/- Funeral expenses : Rs. 5,000/- Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000/- Loss of consortium : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of love and affection : Rs. 40,000/- ------------------ Total : Rs.6,11,000/- ======== 9. The appellants mainly sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of dependency and on other heads. 10. The Tribunal took annual income of the deceased as Rs.48,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, took Rs.32,000/- as his annual contribution to his family. The deceased was aged 32 at the time of the accident. Therefore, the Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded a compensation of Rs.5,44,000/- towards the loss of dependency. According to the claimants, deceased was running a wooden furniture workshop and he was also functioning as a Director of Kairali Kuries Private Ltd., Ernakulam and he was earning of Rs.15,000/- per month MACA 1911/2005 5 from his business. Ext.A12 is the copy of his income-tax return of the year 2000-2001. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that monthly income of the deceased can reasonably be fixed at Rs.4,500/-., which comes to Rs.54,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, balance amount of Rs.36,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. Multiplier of 17 adopted by the Tribunal appears to be reasonable. Thus, for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.6,12,000/- (Rs.36,000/- x 17). Thus, the claimants are entitled an additional compensation of Rs.68,000/- on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore,we are not disturbing the same. 11. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to additional compensation of Rs.68,000/-. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is corrected as Rs.6,11,000/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. The claimants are MACA 1911/2005 6 entitled to interest @ 7.5 % p.a. from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and and also for the enhanced compensation. The claimants are entitled to proportionate costs. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimants. 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. mn.