IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2011 / 1ST ASWINA 1933 MACA.No. 1452 of 2011() ----------------------- O.P(MV) NO.1040/2002 OF M.A.C.A, MAVELIKKARA APPELLANT : RESPONDENT ------------------------ MATHEW C.KUTTUSSERY, KUTTISSERY VEEDU, MMC WARD NO.XII, PUTHIYAKAVU, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN R.REJI THARA THAMBAN B.BIPIN, REVATHY P.NAIR RESPONDENTS : PETITIONERS -------------------------- 1. SHYLAJA, W/O.LATE RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, KARIMPOLIL VEEDU, PALLIPAD,THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, PIN 690515. 2. ISWARYA R.S.NAIR, D/O.LATE RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, KARIMPOLIL VEEDU, PALLIPAD,THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, PIN 690515. 3. ARCHANA R.S.NAIR, D/O.LATE RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, KARIMPOLIL VEEDU, PALLIPAD,THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, PIN 690515. 4. LEKSHMIKUTTY AMMA, M/O.LATE RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, KARIMPOLIL VEEDU, PALLIPAD,THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, PIN 690515. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. *********************** M.A.C.A No.1452 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The sole respondent before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. Claimants had staked the claim for compensation for the loss suffered by them on account of the death of their predecessor one Rajasekharan Nair, aged 48 years, who succumbed to the injuries suffered in a motor accident which took place on 13.12.2001. The appellant was the owner cum driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. The appellant's vehicle was not admittedly covered by any policy of insurance. The appellant, though served and entered appearance through a counsel, did not file any written statement. The claim was filed in 2002 and the matter was ultimately taken up for disposal on 30.04.2011. Till that date, no written statement was filed. The Tribunal had before it Exts.A1 to A7. The Tribunal accepted the documents produced and proceeded to pass the impugned award. Against a total claim limited to Rs.9 lakhs, only an amount of Rs.3,94,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal as per the details given in para.8 of the impugned award, which we extract M.A.C.A No.1452 of 2011 2 below. Sl.No. Head of claim Amount awarded 1 Transportation and ambulance expenses Rs. 2,500.00 2 Damage to clothing Rs. 500.00 3 Loss of dependency Rs.3,51,000.00 (3000X12X13X3/4) 4 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000.00 5 Loss of estate etc. Rs. 15,000.00 6 Loss of love and affection Rs. 10,000.00 7 Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000.00 Total Rs.3,94,000.00 2. Called upon to explain the challenge and be specific, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was denied a reasonable opportunity to contest the claim. Why did the appellant not file a written statement in this claim petition filed as early as in 2002 till its disposal on 30.04.2011? No satisfactory reasons are advanced. We are, in these circumstances, unable to accept the contention that the appellant has been denied reasonable opportunity to contest the proceedings. 3. There is a vague challenge raised against the quantum of compensation awarded. We have gone through the M.A.C.A No.1452 of 2011 3 materials available. We are unable to find any reason to interfere with the compensation awarded. For loss of dependency, an amount of Rs.3,51,000/- has been awarded. Though salary certificate was produced, the Tribunal did not act upon the same. The Tribunal reckoned only Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income to ascertain the quantum of compensation for loss of dependency. In any view of the matter, we are unable to find any defect in the computation of compensation which can persuade us to entertain the challenge against the impugned award at the instance of the appellant. 4. The conclusion hence is inevitable that this appeal must fail and must be dismissed in limine. 5. In the result, this appeal is dismissed in limine. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/ks