IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 M.A.C.A.No. 1259 of 2004(C) ----------------------- OPMV.2380/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/CLAIMANTS --------------------------------- 1. SARA UMMA, W/O. LATE VELLAKUTTY RAWTHER, CHALIRKKAD HOUSE, MYLAMPULLY, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD. 2. ASSANAR S/O. LATE VELLAKUTTY RAWTHER DO. DO. 3. KABEER S/O LATE VELLAKUTTY RAWTHER, DO. DO. 4. PATHA W/O. LATE SAIDHALVI, VELLIKKAD HOUSE, PALAKKAD, NOW RESIDING AT CHALIRKKAD HOUSE, MYLAMPULLY, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD. 5. SAINABA W/O. ABDUL KHADER, THOTTAKKARA VEEDU, KARIMBA P.O., PALAKKAD. 6. BALKHEES W/O. ABOOBACKER, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 2, 3 AND SUPPLE.RESP.NO.4 ---------------------------------------------------- 1. K.K.VASU, S/O. KRISHNAN, MARIYAMMAN KOVIL STREET, FODANUR VIA., CHETTIPALAYAM, COIMBATORE (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE) 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, 720 201, 200C, NAJAPPA ROAD, COIMBATORE-18, (INSURER OF THE VEHICLE) M.A.C.A.No. 1259 of 2004(C) : 2 : 3. REMESH S/O. MANICKAN, PUTHENKUZHY VEEDU, P.O.KODUNTHIRAPPULLY PALAKKAD (DRIVER OF THE VECHCLE (R1 IN OP(MV) WAS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY BY THE ORFER PASSED IN IA 2410/00 DT.24/8/00) BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF FOR R3 SMT.C.I.MUMTAZ FOR R3 SRI.K.K.M..SHERIF FOR R2 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. `````````````````````````````````````````````` M.A.C.A . NO: 1259 OF 2004 ```````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 16th Day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT K. M. Joseph J. The first appellant is the widow of Mr. Vellakutty Rowther (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”). The appellants 2 to 6 are their children. The second appellant was 34 years of age, third appellant was 25 years and appellants 4 to 6 are the married daughters aged 27, 23 and 20 respectively. The compensation awarded is Rs.72,000/- 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel representing the second respondent, Insurance Company and also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants would raise two contentions before us. He would submit that the deceased was M.A.C.A . NO: 1259 OF 2004 : 2 : aged 59 years at the time of accident. In calculating the compensation, the multiplier taken is only 5. Of course the learned counsel representing the Insurance company, would submit that the deceased was 60 years old. But even if he was aged 60 years, the multiplier would be taken as 8, it is pointed out. Therefore, the appellants are justified in demanding that the multiplier be fixed at 8. If we work out the compensation for dependency employing 8 as the multiplier, the compensation would be Rs.96,000/- After deducting Rs.60,000/- already granted, the appellants would be entitled to Rs.36,000/- more. 4. Next he contented that the appellants were given only Rs.2,000/- towards loss of consortium. We find that the appellants were awarded Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering. Even if we were increased the compensation under the head “loss of consortium”, in view of the fact that the appellants are already awarded as legal representatives in a death case, we feel that we need not increase the amount towards loss of consortium. M.A.C.A . NO: 1259 OF 2004 : 3 : Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the appellants are allowed to realise a sum of Rs.36,000/- more with 7.5% interest from the date of petition till the date of realisation, from the second respondent, Insurance Company. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE dl/