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. 1882 of 2005() ----------------------- OPMV.2102/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 2, 3 & 4 IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKAMMA, MOTHENGERI PARAMBU, THIRUVAMKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. K.N.VIJAYAN, DO.DO. 3. K.N.SAVITHRI, DO.DO. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) ------------------------------------ 1. FRANCIS XAVIER, PROPRIETOR, MEGHA ROADWAYS, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11. 2. KIZHORE KUMAR, PALLATHIL HOUSE, THIRUVANKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., M.G.ROAD, RAVIPURAM, KOCHI-16. 4. LEELAMANI, PALLATHU PARAMBU HOUSE, THIRUVAMKULAM P.O. 5. P.M.BABU, DO.DO. 6. P.M.SUNIL, DO.DO. 7. P.M.VINAYAKUMAR, DO.DO. 8. K.KANIYAPPAN, 4/65, MAHADEVAPURAM, METTUPALAYAM, TAMILNADU STATE. 9. MANI, DO.DO. M.A.C.A.NO.1882/2005 10. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD., M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-35. ADV. SRI.P.N.SASIDHARAN FOR R4 TO 6 SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R10 SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No. 1882 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)No.2102/1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. They are the mother, brother and sister of deceased Bhasy @ Mani who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal, dated July 8, 2005 awarding a compensation of Rs. 89,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in that accident. 2. On February 13, 1991 at about 1.30 p.m., while the deceased was travelling in the lorry bearing Reg.No.KBE 8416 along Thrissur-Palakkad National Highway, the jeep collided with another lorry bearing Reg.No.TDH-1333. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Alleging negligence against the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.KBE 8416, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation from MACA.No.1882/2005 2 respondents 1 to 3 in the O.P. 3. Respondents 1 to 3 in the O.P. are the owner, driver and insurer of the lorry bearing Reg.No.KBE 8416. During the pendency of the O.P., the second respondent in the O.P. died and his legal heirs were impleaded as respondents 4 to 7 in the O.P. Respondents 8 to 10 in the O.P. are the owner, driver and insurer of the lorry bearing Reg.No.TDH 1333. First respondent, the owner of the offending lorry filed a written statement admitting the accident, but denied the liability. Respondents 3 and 10 in the O.P., the insurers of the vehicle filed written statements admitting the policy of the respective vehicles. 4. PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A8 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.KBE-8416 and awarded a total compensation of Rs.89,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation against respondents 1 to 3. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the MACA.No.1882/2005 3 Tribunal. 5. Heard 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 driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.KBE-8416 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.89,000/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Loss of dependency - Rs. 69,000/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 5,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs. 7,500/- Loss of love and affection - Rs. 7,500/- 8. The counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation for loss of dependency, for loss of love and affection and for pain and suffering endured by the deceased . 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,500/- and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses the balance amount of Rs. 1,000/- was taken as his monthly contribution to MACA.No.1882/2005 4 his family for the first two years and for the remaining 15 years, his contribution was taken as Rs.250/- per month and awarded Rs. 69,000/- for loss of dependency. According to the claimants, the deceased was working as a cleaner earning Rs.4,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/- which comes to Rs. 30,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. The deceased was aged 28 at the time of the accident. But the claimants are his parents, brother and sister. Father was aged 50 at the time of the accident and mother aged 46. That apart, the father died during the pendency of the O.P. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that a multiplier of 13 would be reasonable in this case. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 2,60,000/- ( 20,000 x 13). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,91,000/-. 10. For loss of love and affection, Rs. 7,500/- was awarded by the Tribunal which appears to be quite inadequate. Having regard to MACA.No.1882/2005 5 the age of the claimants and the age of the deceased, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.12,500/-. 11. For the pain and suffering endured, Rs. 7,500/- was awarded by the Tribunal which appears to be very low. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 12. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. 13. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 2,11,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced MACA.No.1882/2005 6 compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent in the O.P. 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 The words “third respondent”occurring in the penultimate sentence in the operative portion of the judgment at page No.6 are substituted with the words “tenth respondent”, vide order dated 31/5/2011 in I.A.No.1263/2011 in M.A.C.A.No.1882/2005. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial) sv. MACA.No.1882/2005 7 MACA.No.1882/2005 8