IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 105 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.858/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------- 1. SYAMALA, W/O.SUKUMARAN, AMBUKUNNEL HOUSE, PEROOR KARA, PEROOR VILLAGE, PEROOR P.O. 2. SUJITHMON @ SUJITH SUKUMARAN (MINOR) S/O.SUKUMARAN, AMBUKUNNEL HOUSE, PEROOR KARA, PEROOR VILLAGE, PEROOR P.O., DATE OF BIRTH 18/5/90 REP. BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND SHYAMALA W/O.SUKUMARAN. DO. DO. 3. SUJIMOL @ SUJIMOL SUKUMARAN (MINOR) D/O.SUKUMARAN, AMBUKUNNEL HOUSE, PEROOR KARA, PEROOR VILLAGE, PEROOR P.O., DATE OF BIRTH 24/8/91, REP. BY HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND SHYAMALA, W/O.SUKUMARAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.BABY THOMAS SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. SURENDRAN, S/O.SHANKARAN, KUZHINNIMULA HOUSE, KIZHAKOMBU P.O., KIZHAKOMBU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. K.A. BABY, S/O.AVIRA, KOCHUVIRIPPIL, KIZHAKOMBU P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM KARA & VILLAGE. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., MOOVATTUPUZHA BRANCH, MOOVATTUPUZHA P.O. ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF FOR R.3 SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASHROF SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.S.PRASANTH FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.105 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.858/2003 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated August 23, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs. 10,32,545/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Sukumaran in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : Deceased Sukumaran was a toddy tapper and used to earn Rs. 17,000/- per month, according to the claimants. Claimants are the wife and minor children of deceased Sukumaran. Deceased Sukumaran was aged 44 at the time of the accident. On May 24, 2003 at about 5.15 p.m., deceased Sukumaran was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-5/M-6423 along Marangattupally-Kadaplamattom road. When he reached near Marangattupally Veterinary Hospital, a tipper lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-7/AF-3507 came at a high speed from the MACA.No.105/2007 2 opposite direction and knocked him down. He sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment at Matha Hospital, Thellakom at about 9 p.m. on the same day. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending tipper lorry by first respondent. First respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the offending tipper are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. Claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 15,50,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending lorry remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending lorry filed a written statement admitting the policy, but contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased.. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the MACA.No.105/2007 3 rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,32,545/-. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 6. 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 is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation ? 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 10,32,545/-. The break up of the award amount is as under : Loss of dependency -Rs.9,83,920/- Loss of consortium -Rs. 15,000/- Loss of love and affection -Rs. 15,000/- Pain and suffering -Rs. 10,000/- Transport to hospital -Rs. 2,000/- Funeral expenses -Rs. 3,000/- Medical expenses -Rs. 3,625/- ------------------ Total -Rs. 10,32,545/- ============ MACA.No.105/2007 4 8. According to the claimants, the deceased was aged 44 and as a toddy worker, he used to earn Rs. 17,000/- per month. The Tribunal has accepted Ext.A4 , the certificate issued by the Welfare Fund Inspector of the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board and fixed his annual income as Rs. 1,05,420/- which appears to be reasonable. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, his annual dependency was fixed as Rs. 70280/- which is not seriously challenged. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 14 as the age of the deceased shown in the postmortem certificate was 44 and in Ext.A8, death certificate it is shown as 46. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants as well as the of the deceased Sukumaran, we feel that a multiplier of 15 would be reasonable in this case. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 10,54,200/-( 70280/- x 15). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 70,280/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable. Therefore, we are not disturbing the same. 9. Thus, the claimants are entitled to an additional MACA.No.105/2007 5 compensation of Rs. 70,280/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 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 sv. MACA.No.105/2007 6