IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 MFA.No. 748 of 2002() --------------------- OPMV.960/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONERS ---------------------- 1. K.N.PAVITHRAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, KURIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSEM, PATHIRIPPALAM, KOLANGAPPARA P.O., KRISHNAGIRI VILLAGE, S. BATHERY TALUK. 2. PRADEEP KUMAR, S/O.K.N.PAVITHRAN, KUZHIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PATHIRIPLAM, KRISHNAGIRI VILLAGE, S. BATHERY TALUK. 3. BAIJU, S/O.K.N.PAVITHRAN, RESIDING DO. 4. BINDU(MINOT), REPRESENTED BY FATHER & GUARDIAN K.N.PAVITHRAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, KUZHIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PATHIRIPALAM, KOLAGAPPARA P.O., KRISHNAGIRI VILLAGE, S. BATHERY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.J.ANTONY RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. ADRU @ ABDURAHIMAN, S/O.AHAMMEDKOYA, PALORAMMAL HOUSE, KIZHKOTH P.O., KODUVALLY-VIA, KOZHIKODE(DRIVER OF KLW 2750 BUS) 2. M.C.SUNDARAN, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, NAMBIARKUNNU P.O., CHEERAL VILLAGE, S. BATHERY TALUK (OWNER OF KLW 2750 BUS). 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KALPETTA. (POLICY NO.570309/31/93/00541) BY ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA,JJ. ----------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.748 of 2002 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J. A 16 year old boy suffered fatal injury in a motor accident due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the third respondent Insurance Company. Claim was filed by the father, brothers and a minor sister of the deceased. Total amount awarded by the Tribunal was only Rs.62,400/- (wrongly written as Rs.62,300/- in the award due to arithmetical error). The main dispute is regarding the compensation awarded for the loss of family contribution. The deceased was a student at that time. Admittedly, he was not an earning member. But, at the same time, loss of a child cannot be underestimated. The Supreme Court repeatedly held that death of a child above 14 years requires a higher assessment of compensation. The Apex Court has also held that even though second schedule is framed for calculating compensation under Section 163A, it can be taken as guidance for fixing compensation under Section 166 also. Under second schedule, notional income of a non earning person is fixed as Rs.15,000/-. We adopt the same here M.F.A.748 of 2002 2 also. For calculating compensation, one-third has to be deducted. The deceased was a 16 year old boy. Multiplier as per second schedule is 16. But, father was around 50 years old and sister aged 17. Considering the age of the claimant and the deceased, we take 15 as the multiplier instead of 16. If that be so, compensation payable will be 10,000 x 15 = 1,50,000/-. We are of opinion that for a death of 16 year old child atleast Rs.1,50,000/- should be awarded for loss of family contribution. Tribunal awarded only Rs.50,000/- under this head. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to an additional amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. The above amount should e deposited by the third respondent Insurance Company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till deposit, over and above the compensation decreed by the Tribunal. On deposit of the above amount, 50% is allowed to be withdrawn by the first appellant and the balance amount is allowed to be withdrawn by the other appellants in equal proportion. The appeal is allowed, partly. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs. M.F.A.748 of 2002 3 J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------ M.F.A.No.748 of 2002 ------------------------------ JUDGMENT 22.1.2008