IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 MACA.No. 428 of 2004(B) ----------------------------------- (O.P(MV).NO.917/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANTS: --------------------- 1. SARASAMMA, AGED 55, W/O. CHELLAPPAN NAIR, EDAVANA PUTHEN PURACKAL, KARUVATTA. 2. SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 27, S/O. CHELLAPPAN NAIR, DO. 3. SUMESH, AGED 21, DO. BY SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SRI.E.RAFEEK. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. M.K. VIJAYAN, S/O. MANIYAN, KALAPPURA CHERAYIL, KARUVATTA SOUTH. 2. K.G. JOHN, S/O. GEEVARGHESE, KANIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERUTHANA. 3. BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., KAYAMKULAM. 4. SUNNY K.M., S/O. MANY, KARUKAPPILLIL HOUSE, POOVANCHIRA P.O., TRICHUR. 5. K.P. ELIAS, S/O. K.N. PATHROSE, KAVANAKUDIYIL HOUSE, POOVANCHIRA. M.A.C.A. NO.428/2004-B: 6. BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., TRIPUNITHURA. 7. PADMINI AMMA, PADMINI NILAYAM WEST OF R.K. JUNCTION, VETTUVENI MURI, HARIPADU. 8. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, PARVATHY BHAVAN, CHERUTHANA SOUTH MURI, CHERUTHANA VILLAGE. 9. SREENIVASAN NAIR, C/O. SAVITHRI S. NAIR, 65 UTTAR GUJARATH, AUDYOGIE VASAHAT, NARODA ROAD, AHAMEDABAD-380 025. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY, SMT.HEERA.D, R3 BY SMT.P.A.REZIYA. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No. 428 of 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimants in O.P.(MV) No.917/1994 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikara challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 4, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,69,000/- for the loss caused to them, on account of the death of Chellappan Nair in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these:- Deceased Chellappan Nair was aged 45 at the time of the accident and was earning Rs.2,000/- per month as a Ticket Collector in a Cinema Theatre and also as an Agriculturist. On February 28, 1994 he was travelling in a Mini bus bearing registration KL-4/A 7504 along National Highway 47. At about 8.45 a.m. when the bus reached near Karuvatta, it collided head on with a tanker lorry bearing MACA428/2004 2 registration No. KL-8/B 774. Chellappan Nair sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained, while undergoing treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Alappuzha on the same day. The claimants are his wife, children and mother. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent, driver of the offending bus. The first respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimants, who are the dependents and legal heirs of the deceased. Respondents 4 to 6 are owner, driver and insurer respectively of the tanker lorry involved in the accident. The claimants claimed compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the offending bus, filed a joint written statement, admitting the accident, but contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the tanker lorry. Respondents 3 and 6, insurer of the bus as well as that of MACA428/2004 3 the tanker lorry, filed written statement admitting the policy of the respective vehicles. Respondents 4 and 5, the driver and owner of the tanker lorry involved in the accident, remained absent before the Tribunal. 4. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts. A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident occurred due to negligence of first respondent, driver of the offending bus, and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,69,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. 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. 5. During the pendency of the O.P. fourth respondent, mother of the deceased, died. Her legal heirs were impleaded as Addl. respondents 7 to 9. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3. MACA428/2004 4 7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent, driver of the offending bus, is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation ? 8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,69,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000/- Funeral and transportation : Rs. 6,000/- Expenses. Loss of consortium and : Rs. 18,000/- loss of love and affection. Total pecuniary loss suffered. : Rs.1,80,000/- ------------------ Total : Rs.2,19,000/- ======== 9. The learned counsel for the appellants mainly sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of dependency. 10. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,200/- and after deducting 1/3 for his MACA428/2004 5 personal expenses, took Rs.1,500/- as his monthly contribution to his family and adopted a multiplier of 10 and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- for loss of dependency. Ext.A6,certificate issued by the proprietor, K.R. Talkies, shows that the deceased was given a salary of Rs.2,000/- per month. Therefore, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in taking his monthly income as Rs.2,200/- and after deducting1/3rd for his personal expenses, taking Rs.1,500/- as his monthly contribution to his family. Deceased Chellappan Nair was aged 49 at the time of the accident. Therefore, the proper multiplier that has to be adopted in this case is 15. Thus for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to the compensation of Rs.2,70,000/- (Rs.1,500/- x 12 x 15). Thus, on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.90,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and, therefore, are not disturbing the same. The apportionment fixed by the Tribunal will stand. MACA428/2004 6 11. In the result, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.90,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs. The third 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 above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.