IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 902 of 2007() -------------------------------- OPMV.367/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): /PETITIONERS: ----------------------- 1. SUBRAMANIAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. KUNJU, KUTTATHUMVEETTIL HOUSE, AZHIKODE P.O., THRISSUR. (FATHER OF THE DECEASED). 2. CHANDRAMATHI, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O. SUBRAMANIAN, KUKTTATHUMVEETTIL HOUSE, AZHIKODE P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. (MOTHER OF THE DECEASED). 3. UDAYA AGED 29 YEARS, W/O. KANNAN, KUTTATHUMVEETTIL HOUSE, AZHIODE P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. (WIFE OF THE DECEASED). 4. KIRAN DEV., AGED 6 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN, KUTTATHUMVEETTIL HOUSE, AZHIKODE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. (SON OF THE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY MOTHER UDAYA). BY ADV. SRI.N.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS: -------------------------- 1. ANOOPKUMAR K.K., ITTITHARAYIL HOUSE, P.O. KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. (OWNER OF THE BUS KL-8/D-1779). 2. K.L. SANTHOSH, S/O.LAKSHMANAN, KALLATH HOUSE, KANDASSANKADAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT. (DRIVER OF THE BUS KL-8/D-1779). 3. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM. (INSURER POLICY NO.1999/6308427/209656. VALID FROM 25-01-01 TO 24-01-2002) ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A. No. 902 of 2007 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 22nd 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.367/2001 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated October 5, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs. 2,76,500/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of Kannan in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : Deceased Kannan was aged 24 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs. 3,000/- from fishing work, according to the claimants. The claimants are parents, wife and minor son of the deceased. On February 2, 2001 at about 6.55 p.m., he was riding his scooter bearing Reg.No.KL8/E 6779 along Kodungallur-Chettuva Sector of National Highway. At that time, a bus bearing Reg.No.KL- MACA 902/2007 2 8/D 1779, driven by second respondent which was proceeding in front applied sudden break without giving any signal. The scooter hit against the bus and the deceased was thrown away. Deceased sustained very serious injuries. He succumbed to the injuries sustained at about 8.15 p.m. on the same day. while undergoing treatment at Modern Hospital, Kodungallur. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased. Claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending bus remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy, but MACA 902/2007 3 contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. PWs 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A8 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 rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 2, 76,500/-. 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 second 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 ? MACA 902/2007 4 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2,76,500/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Transportation charges - Rs. 1,000/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 3,000/- Loss of estate - Rs. 2,500/- Loss of consortium - Rs. 12,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 6,000/- Loss of love and affection - Rs. 12,000/- Loss of dependency - Rs. 2,40,000/- ----------------------- Total - Rs. 2,76,500/- =========== 8. Counsel for the claimants mainly sought enhancement of the compensation for the loss of dependency. According to the claimants, deceased was aged 24 at the time of the accident and was earning Rs. 3,000/- per month as a fisherman. As no document was produced by the claimants to prove the income of the deceased, the Tribunal took his monthly income as Rs. 2,000/- and adopted a multiplier of 15 and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, awarded a compensation of Rs. 2, 40,000/- for the loss of dependency. MACA 902/2007 5 9. In our view, as the claimant was aged only 24 at the time of the accident, we feel that his monthly income can reasonably be fixed at Rs. 2,500/-. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, his annual contribution to the claimants can be taken as Rs. 20,000/-. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 15 is not seriously challenged. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- for the loss of dependency ( 20,000 x 15). Therefore, on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 60,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 60,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate cost. The Tribunal awarded interest only at the rate of 6% which is inadequate. Therefore, for the compensation already awarded also, the claimants are MACA 902/2007 6 entitled to interest at the rate of 9%. 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. mn.