IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 MACA.No. 692 of 2005() ---------------------- OP(MV)NO.131/2000 of MACT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. ROSILY, W/O.DECEASED ANTO, KUTTOOKARAN HOUSE, CHIRAKAZHATHESSERI, PERAMBRA P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. LINTO, S/O.DECEASED ANTO, MINOR REP. BY MOTHER ROSILY, KUTTOOKARAN HOUSE, CHIRAKAZHATHESSERI, PERAMBRA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. MARY, W/O.KOCHAPPU, MOTHER OF DECEASED ANTO, KUTTOOKARAN HOUSE, CHIRAKAZHATHESSERI, PERAMBRA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MRS. DE LA VICTOR ISABELLA, 9, THAMBU NAICKER STREET, PONDICHERY-605 001(DELETED) 2. P.ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.KUPPUSWAMY, 35, IIND CROSS THILAKA NAGAR, PONDICHERY.(DELETED) . 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., 261, J.N. STREET, PONDICHERY-605 001. NAME OF RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE PETITIONER AS PER ORDER DT.9.4.07 IN IA 754/07 ADV. SMT.DEEPA GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.692 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)No.131/2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. They are the wife, son and mother of deceased Anto who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated October 21, 2004 awarding a compensation of `.2,22,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in that accident. 2. On December 22, 1999 at about 9.15 p.m., while the deceased was walking along National Highway and when he reached at Perambra Church Junction, he was knocked down by a van bearing Reg.No.PY-01/A 1863 driven by the second respondent. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of `.5,00,000/-. MACA.No.692/2005 2 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending van remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending van filed a written statement admitting the policy, but attributed negligence to the deceased. 4. Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. Exts.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 and awarded a total compensation of `.2,22,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the 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 second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only MACA.No.692/2005 3 question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of ` 2,20,000/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Transportation - ` 500/- Funeral expenses - ` 2,000/- Loss of estate - ` 2,500/- Loss of consortium - `10,000/- Loss of love and affection - `10,000/- Pain and suffering - ` 5,000/- Loss of dependency - `1,92,000/- 8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of compensation for loss of dependency and on other heads. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as ` 1,500/- which works out to ` 18,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of ` 12,000/- was taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 16 and awarded ` 1,92,000/- for the loss of dependency. The deceased was aged 37 at the time of the accident and was MACA.No.692/2005 4 employed as a painter in St.Joseph Painting Works. Ext.A7 is the certificate issued by his employer showing that he was drawing a salary of ` 4,500/-. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at ` 3,000/- which comes to ` 36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of ` 24,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 16 which is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of ` 3,84,000/- ( 24,000 x 16). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of ` 1,92,000/-. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 10,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- for loss of love and affection. Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- under each of the above count would be reasonable. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. MACA.No.692/2005 5 11. 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. 12. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 2,02,000/-. 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 compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. 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 sv. MACA.No.692/2005 6 MACA.No.692/2005 7