IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 215 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.2542/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------------- 1. M.J. VARGHESE, S/O. LATE JOSEPH, MAKKOLLIYIL HOUSE, NEAR S.B.HIGH SCHOOL, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. ROSAMMA VARGHESE, W/O. M.J. VARGHESE, OF DO. DO. 3. JOB VARGHESE, S/O. M.J. VARGHESE, DO. DO 4. JOSEPH VARGHESE, S/O. M.J. VARGHESE, DO. DO. 5. JESSY VARGHESE, D/O.M.J. VARGHESE DO. DO BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE KURUVILLA(ALAPPUZHA) RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. JOSEPH JOSE, S/O. JOSEPH MANAMEL HOUSE, MAMMOODU P.O. CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATINAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., THIRUVALLA. ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.215 OF 2004 ------------------------------------- Dated 1st September, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Son of the appellants 1 and 2 sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident at the prime age of 26 and succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the second respondent insurance company, but, only awarded an amount of Rs.1,41,000/= as compensation against a claim of Rs.5,00,000/=. The only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. It is the contention of the claimants that the deceased was aged 26 at the time of accident and 18 should be taken as the multiplier taking guidance from the second schedule. It is further contended that he was the entire hope of the family and considering the present longevity of life, a higher multiplier should be applied. However, the Apex Court held that when a person dies before marriage, only the age of the claimants has to be looked into. Considering the age of the father and mother, the Tribunal fixed 8 as the multiplier. We see no ground to change the same as we are bound by the Supreme Court decisions. Exhibit A21 employment certificate was produced showing that he was earning Rs.3,000/= per month at the time MACA.215/2004 2 of the accident. He was a Lab Technician, but, Ext.A21 was not relied on by the Tribunal because the employer was not examined. According to the claimants, the deceased was a technically qualified person and considering the future prospects also more than Rs.3,000/= should be taken as the monthly income. Considering the fact that he was a technically qualified person and considering Ext.A21 certificate, we fix Rs.3,000/= as the monthly income. After deducting one third for personal expenses, we take Rs.2,000/= as the monthly loss of family contribution. If that be so, compensation payable for loss of dependency will be Rs.1,92,000/= (2000 x 12 x 8) instead of Rs.1,28,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. So, the additional compensation payable under that head will be Rs.64,000/=. Immediately after the accident the deceased was taken to K.G.Hospital, Coimbatore and he died in the hospital. Only Rs.5,000/= was awarded for pain and suffering. We award an additional amount of Rs.2,500/= for pain and suffering. It is submitted that he was taken to the Hospital in Coimbatore from the place of accident in Kerala in an ambulance and thereafter his body was taken back to his house at Changanacherry, which is more than 300 Kms. from the hospital. Only Rs.1,000/= was awarded for transportation. We award an additional amount of Rs.3,500/= under that head. Therefore, the total additional compensation payable will MACA.215/2004 3 be Rs.70,000/=. We are of the opinion that no enhancement is necessary under other heads. The above additional amount of Rs.70,000/= should be deposited by the second respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit, over and above the amount decreed by the Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, the appellants 1 and 2 are allowed to withdraw the same in equal proportion. The appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE tks