IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 MACA.No. 333 of 2003(B) ----------------------------------- O.P(MV).NO.1673/1998 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY. .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------- 1. FATHIMA, D/O. MAYANKUTTY, VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, P.O.EDOOR. 2. MUHAMMED ALI, S/O. IBRAHIM, VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, P.O.EDOOR. 3. MAIMOONATH, D/O. IBRAHIM (MINOR), AGED 17 YEARS, VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, EDOOR P.O. 4. SHOUKATHALI, S/O. IBRAHIM, AGED 15 YEARS, (MINOR), VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, P.O.EDOOR. 5. SHUHELI, S/O. IBRAHIM, AGED 10 YEARS (MINOR), VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, P.O.EDOOR. 6. TUNFELIM D/O. IBRAHIM, AGED 8 YEARS, (MINOR), VELLIKKAKETTU HOUSE, P.O.EDOOR. (FATHIMA MOTHER OF MINORS REPRESENTS THEM). BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE, ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. K.MURALIDHARAN, S/O. BALAN, KALLANJIVALAPPIL, NARATH ONAPPARAMBA, KSRTC DRIVER, KSRTC DEPT., P.O.KANNUR. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSTRC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. JOHNSON P JOHN,SC KSRTC. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO.333 OF 2003 (B) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. Husband of the 1st appellant died at the age of 38 in a motor accident while driving an autorickshaw. The wife and five minor children applied for compensation. The tribunal found that accident occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent driver of the bus owned by the 2nd respondent, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. Incident occurred on 25.5.1997. Against a claim of Rs.6,00,000/-, tribunal has awarded only Rs.2,28,500/-. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation. 2. The deceased was an auto driver. He was a qualified professional driver. According to the claimants, he was getting Rs.4,500/- as monthly income. PW2, employer deposed that he was giving Rs.120/- per day to the deceased. There was no counter evidence. Being a professional auto MACA.333/03 2 driver, his income apart from bata is Rs.120/- per day cannot be disbelieved. Fixation of monthly income as Rs.1,500/- by the tribunal is too low as he was maintaining a large family. He was maintaining his wife and five children from the income earned by him as an auto driver. Even though it is stated that he was getting all days work, we can presume that atleast he was getting 25 days work in a month and we fix Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income. After deducting Rs.1,000/- towards personal expenses, Rs.2,000/- can be fixed as the monthly family contribution. At the time of death, he was aged 38 and tribunal has taken 16 as the multiplier. His wife was only 29 years at the time of accident. It is submitted that in view of the increase in life expectancy, a higher multiplier should be taken. But considering the decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court, we are of the opinion that since tribunal has taken multiplier, taking 2nd schedule as the guideline, we see no ground to enhance the same. Therefore, compensation payable will be Rs.3,84,000/- (Rs.2,000 x 12 x 16 = Rs.3,84,000/-). Tribunal has granted only Rs.1,92,000/- as loss of dependency income. Therefore, he will get an additional amount of Rs.1,92,000/- over and above the compensation granted by the tribunal. It is argued that MACA.333/03 3 compensation granted for loss of consortium for the young widow and love and affection to the children etc. are very low. Considering the total amount granted, we are not enhancing the compensation further. Thus additional amount of Rs.1,92,000/- should be deposited by the 1st and 2nd respondents as they are jointly and severally liable to pay the same. The 2nd respondent, who is vicariously liable is directed to deposit the same with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit over and above the decreed amount by the tribunal. On deposit of the amount, 1st appellant is allowed to withdraw 1/3 rd of the amount and balance in equal proportion by the other claimants. With the above observations, this appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO.333 OF 2003 (B) --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd July, 2008