IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2011 / 15TH ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 914 of 2011() ---------------------- OPMV.247/2000 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANTS:PETITIONERS -------------- 1. INDULEKHA, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.HARIKUMAR, SREEDEVI VILASAM, WARD NO.4, AMBALAPPUZHA. 2. ARENDUKUMAR (MINOR) AGED 14 YEARS, REP. BY HIS MOTHER INDULEKHA, W/O.HARIKUMAR, SREEDEVI VILASAM, WARD NO.4, AMBALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENTS:RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. A.RAVICHANDRAN, S/O.ARUMUGHAN, KARAYALKUZHI, VELLAMADAM, KANIYAKUMARI DISTRICT – 629305. 2. NOUSHAD, THACHALAZHIKATHU VEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, KOLLAM – 690 001. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MALIK MAHAM, HPO JUNCTION, NAGARCOIL, TAMIL NADU – 629 001. 4. GOMATHI AMMA, AGED 70 YEARS, SREEDEVI VILASAM, WARD NO.4, AMBALAPPUZHA – 688004. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. *********************** C.M.Appl.No.1443 of 2011 & M.A.C.A No.914 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 6th day of July, 2011 ORDER/JUDGMENT BASANT, J. C.M.Appl.No.1443 of 2011 is to condone the delay of 1885 days in filing a Motor Accident Claims Appeal. The appeal in turn is directed against the quantum of compensation awarded to the appellants following the accidental death in a motor accident of their predecessor, the deceased, who was aged 33 years. As against the claim of Rs.4,00,000/-, only an amount of Rs.2,39,000/- was awarded. 2. We have gone through the affidavit filed to support the prayer for condonation of delay. There is an enormous delay of 1885 days. We are not persuaded to agree that there is sufficient reason to justify the prayer for condonation of this enormous delay. The petition for condonation of delay therefore deserves to be dismissed. 3. In our anxiety to ensure that the rejection of the prayer for condonation of delay does not result in miscarriage of justice, we had requested the learned counsel for the appellants M.A.C.A No.914 of 2011 2 to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellants belatedly want to mount against the impugned award. The learned counsel for the appellants was heard on that aspect. 4. The deceased was a bookbinder, aged about 33 years. The claimants are his widow, aged 27 years, minor child, aged 3 years and mother, aged 70 years. The Tribunal awarded the compensation as per details shown below: i) Loss of dependency : Rs.2,04,000.00 (1500 X 12 X 2/3 X 17) ii) Funeral expenses : Rs. 5,000.00 iii) Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000.00 iv) Ambulance charges : Rs. 3,000.00 v) Loss of consortium : Rs. 10,000.00 vi) Loss of love and affection : Rs. 10,000.00 vii) Loss of estate : Rs. 2,000.00 ........................ Total : Rs.2,39,000.00 ========= The said amount was ordered to be paid along with interest @ 6% per annum. M.A.C.A No.914 of 2011 3 5. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned award. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amount of Rs.1,500/- reckoned as monthly income is too low. We must alertly remind ourselves that the accident had taken place on 15.05.1997. Though it was asserted in the petition that the deceased was conducting a binding press, at the stage of evidence it was asserted that he was a book binder. No better evidence whatsoever was adduced in support of that assertion. The Tribunal, in these circumstances, drawing inspiration evidently from clause 6 of the second schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, reckoned the notional monthly income as Rs.1,500/-. We are unable to hold that the Tribunal has committed any such error warranting appellate interference. The learned counsel for the appellants then contends that interest is awarded only @ 6% per annum. Interest must have been awarded at least @ 7.5% per annum, submits the learned counsel for the appellants. We note that the claim itself was lodged only on 29.02.2000 long after the accident. The awarding of interest @ 6% per annum cannot be, in these circumstances, said to be such an inadequacy warranting invocation of the M.A.C.A No.914 of 2011 4 appellate powers under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 6. We are satisfied that no failure of justice is likely to result by our decision not to condone the delay in filing the appeal. 7. In the result: a) C.M.Appl.No.1443 of 2011 is, in these circumstances, dismissed; b) Consequently the appeal shall stand dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) rtr/