IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2011 / 28TH POUSHA 1932 MACA.No. 1830 of 2005() -------------------- OPMV.1862/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI ................... APPELLANTS / CLAIMANTS : ------------------------------------------ 1. K.ABIDAI, S/O.MOHAMMED @ KUNHAPPA, KUNNATH HOUSE, KAKKOOTH, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. FATHIA SHALU (MINOR, NOW ARED 51/2. YEARS) REP. BY GUARDIAN FATHER, K. ABIDAI, S/O.MOHAMMED @ KUNHAPPA. 3. ULLATTIL JAMEELA, W/O.THE LATE MOHAMMED ULLATTIL HOUSE, VALMBOOR, ANGADIPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. M.P. PRAKASH RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS : ------------------------------------------------ 1. MOHAMMED YOOSAF.V., S/O.M.YAKOOB, PALAKALATH PUTHAN VEEDU, KODITHOOKKIYA KUNNU (DRIVER). 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (OWNER). R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.No. 1830 of 2005 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV) No. 1862 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri. They are the husband, minor daughter and mother of U. Laila who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 30, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs.2,29,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Laila in the accident. 2. The accident happened on September 11, 2001 at about 3.30 p.m. at Kizhakkekotta, Manjeri. Laila was pillion riding on the scooter with her minor child ridden by her husband 1st claimant. At that time a K.S.R.T.C. bus bearing registration No.KL-15-76 (TR 37) driven by the 1st respondent came from behind and dashed against the scooter. She and her child MACA 1830/2005 2 sustained serious injuries and she succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Alleging negligence against the 1st respondent driver of the bus, the claimants filed the Original Petition before the tribunal under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 6 lakhs. 3. The 1st respondent, driver of the offending bus remained absent before the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent Managing Director of K.S.R.T.C. filed a written statement admitting the policy and attributed negligence to the rider of the scooter. 4. This O.P. was tried along with the O.P. filed by the minor child represented by the 1st claimant as guardian and a common award was passed. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A17 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.2,29,000/- with interest at the rate of Rs.6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and a cost of Rs.1,000/-. The claimants have come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of MACA 1830/2005 3 compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and the learned counsel for second respondent/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 1st respondent, driver of the offending bus 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.2,29,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Transport to hospital : Rs. 1,000 Funeral expenses : Rs. 2,000 Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000 Loss of consortium : Rs. 5,000 Loss of dependency : Rs.2,16,000 ------------------ Total : Rs.2,29,000 ======== 8. The appellants mainly sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of dependency and on other heads. MACA 1830/2005 4 9. The Tribunal took the annual income of the deceased as Rs.18,000/-, after deducting 1/3rd for her personal expenses balance amount of Rs.12,000/- was taken as her annual contribution to her family, adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- towards the loss of dependency. Deceased was aged 21 and working as Computer Programmer and used to earn Rs.30,000/- per month, according to the claimants. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that monthly income of the deceased can reasonably be fixed at Rs.3,000/-, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for her personal expenses balance amount of Rs.24,000/- can be taken as her annual contribution to her family. Multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 18 is not seriously challenged in this case. Thus, for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- Thus, the claimants are entitled an additional compensation of Rs. 2,16,000/- on this count. 10. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium which appears to be quite MACA 1830/2005 5 inadequate. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. 11. No compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for loss of love and affection. Taking into consideration the age of the first claimant, we fee that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore,we are not disturbing the same. Regarding the apportionment and disbursement of the same, the direction of the Tribunal will stand. 12. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,46,000/- . The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum, which appears to be very low. They are entitled to with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till realization for the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal and also for the enhanced compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate costs. The second respondent shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of MACA 1830/2005 6 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 found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.