IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1502 of 2006 ----------------------------------- OPMV.513/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. SHARADA, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.CHOYIKUTTY, KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE, MODAKKALLUR P.O., ATHOLY (VIA), KOZHIKODE. 2. SHUBA, AGED 34 YEARS, W/O.LATE AJAYAN, DO. DO. 3. ABHIRAM (MINOR), AGED 9 YEARS, S/O.LATE AJAYAN, -DO- -DO. 4. ADITH (MINOR), AGED 4 1/2 YEARS, S/O.LATE AJAYAN, DO- DO- (3RD AND 4TH APPELLANTS REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER 2ND PETITIONER). BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): REPONDNETS ---------------------------------------------- 1. M.C.ABOOBACKER, SARA NIVAS, CHALAKKARA, NEW MAHE, (R.C.OWNER OF MARUTHI CAR PY-03-1031). 2. MANOJKUMAR, S/O.NANU, AGED 38 YEARS, MADOLLATHIL HOUSE, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DT. (DRIVER OF MARUTHI CAR PY-03-1031 DL.NO.R/TN/009/015825/1999) MACA.NO.1502/2006 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUNICIPAL T.B. SHOPPING COMPLEX, MG ROAD, TELICHERY. POLICY NO.3176088479426, (INSURER OF MARUTHI CAR PY-03-1031). ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 1502 OF 2006 A --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th June, 2009 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. Appellants are the petitioners in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. They are the mother, wife and two children of deceased Ajayan. Ajayan died following a motor vehicle accident. The Appeal relates to the quantum. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent Insurance Company. There is no dispute regarding insurance coverage. Ajayan was a carpenter. According to the appellants, he was earning Rs.4,500/= per month. A Certificate is produced. PW1 employer was examined. He gave evidence to the effect that Ajayan was earning Rs.4,500/= per month. However, it is the first complaint of the appellants that the MFA.1502/06 A 2 income is taken only at Rs.2,000/= per month. This is too meagre, it is contended. Further, it is pointed out that only a sum of Rs.20,000/= was awarded towards loss of love and affection. It is pointed out that the supplemental fourth petitioner was born after the death of Ajayan and this is not factored into the compensation in this regard. It is also pointed out that only Rs.5,000/= is given towards loss of consortium. It is pointed out that the multiplier adopted is eleven and it is pointed out that having regard to the age of the wife, the multiplier should have been seventeen. Shri Lal George, learned counsel for the Insurance Company would support the Award. 3. As far as the multiplier is concerned, we notice that the multiplier applicable in a case of the wife would be seventeen. But, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that if the multiplicand is on the higher side, the multiplier can suitably be selected at a low rate. We would think that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the compensation could be characterised as just, if we adopt the MFA.1502/06 A 3 multiplier of sixteen, provided we also suitably enhance the amount to be fixed as the income of the deceased. It is not as if there is no evidence regarding higher income canvassed by the appellants. There was Certificate and what is more also, the evidence of the employer to the effect that the deceased was earning Rs.4,500/= per month. We must, in particular, keep in mind the calling of the deceased. He was a carpenter. The date of death is also crucial and it was in 2001. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we would think that we can take the income available to the appellants as Rs.2,500/= per month. Applying Rs.2,500/= as the contribution and the multiplier at sixteen, the total amount due will be Rs.4,80,000/=. After deducting the amount already awarded, the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,16,000/=. Regarding loss of love and affection, we feel that the tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/=, which is adequate. So also, we are not inclined, in the facts of this case, to award a further amount towards loss of consortium. The appellants are entitled to MFA.1502/06 A 4 realise a sum of Rs.2,16,000/= with interest at 7.5 per cent from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. The amount shall be shared in the same ratio as is ordered by the tribunal. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge