IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2008 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 298 of 2003(D) ----------------------------------- O.P(MV).NO.158/1999 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR. .................... APPELLANT/ 3RD RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS 1 & 2/ RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AREEKATT POTTAMMAL BEERANKUTTY, S/O. AHAMEDKUTTY, CHOLAKKAL, PERUVALLUR AMSOM, DESOM, P.O. PERUVALLUR, KONDOOTY. 2. NAFESSA, W/O. BEERANKUTTY, P.O. PERUVALLUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. SHAREEFA, CHOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUVALLUR AMSOM, P.O. PERUVALLUR. 4. KHADEEJA, CHOLAKKAL (H), P.O. PERUVALLUR. 5. SHAKEELA, CHOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUVALLUR, P.O. PERUVALLUR. 6. BABY, S/O. JOSEPH, KADASSAMKUNNEL HOUSE, KOORACHUNDU, P.O. ATHOLI, KOZHIKODE. 7. C.P. ABOOBACKER, C/O. MOHAMMED, N.K. HOUSE, TALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) - R1 TO R5. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 298 of 2003 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of May, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. Insurance company questions the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dated 28.9.2002. A 22 year old youngster sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident on 2.1.1998. His father, mother and sisters filed an application for compensation claiming an amount of Rs.Five lakhs. The tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.3,45,900/- and directed the appellant insurance company to pay the same. The only contention raised by the appellant is that the multiplier taken by the tribunal in calculating dependency compensation was on the high side. Deceased was aged 22 years. His father was aged 55 and mother, 45. Taking the age of the deceased, 17 was taken as the multiplier. It is contended by the counsel for the company that since he was unmarried, the age of the claimant ought to have been taken by the tribunal and even if mother's age is taken, only 13 can be the multiplicand. Counsel for the claimant submitted that he was the only earning member in the family. Father was ill and mother and sisters were M.F.A.No. 298/2003 2 entirely dependent on him. Sisters were also expecting help from the brother at the time of their marriage. It is also stated that father (first claimant) died during the pendency of the appeal. Hence, first claimant (first respondent in this appeal) is deleted from the party array. Death of his father during the pendency of the case supports the argument that father was not well at the time of accident and he was the only earning member in the family. He, the only male issue in the family, was aged 22 years at the time of his death. The contention that the deceased was doing business in tin and was getting Rs.7,500/- per month. Only Rs.2,400/- was fixed as the monthly income and one-third was deducted for calculating the family dependency. Considering the fact that there were three younger sisters and father was not well etc. and also considering the fact that he was doing tin business, we are of the opinion that at least Rs.3,000/- ought to have been taken as monthly income and after deducting one-third Rs.2,000/- can be the monthly dependency. As per various decisions, average of the multiplier should be taken for calculating the compensation if the deceased is unmarried. Even if 13 is taken as the multiplier and Rs.2,000/- is the multiplicand, compensation payable will be Rs.3,12,000/-. Tribunal awarded Rs.3,26,400/-. Therefore, total compensation M.F.A.No. 298/2003 3 payable including pain and suffering, medical expenses etc. will be Rs.3,31,500/- instead of Rs.3,45,900/- with interest and proportionate cost as awarded by the tribunal. Appellant should deposit the above amount after adjusting the amount already deposited. Father died during the pendency of the appeal. On deposit of the amount, 50%of the balance amount payable should be disbursed to the mother, second claimant and balance in equal proportion to claimant Nos.3 to 5. Appeal is allowed partly. J.B.Koshy Judge P.N.Ravindran Judge vaa M.F.A.No. 298/2003 4 J.B. KOSHY AND P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.298 of 2003 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:28th May, 2008