IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2010 / 15TH POUSHA 1931 MACA.No. 3154 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.278/2007 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. JOSE V.J., (FATHER) AGED 55 YEARS, EDAPPADICKAROTTU HOUSE, CHENGALAM P.O., KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK. 2. ROSAMMA JOSE (MOTHER) AGED 62 YEARS, -DO- 3. JOBN JOSE, (BROTHER) AGED 26 YEARS, -DO- 4. JASMIN JOSE (SISTER) AGED 24 YEARS,-DO- BY ADV. SRI.P.C.JOSEPH PAZHEPARAMBIL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SUNNY VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, POONKUZHIYIL HOUSE, ADIMALY P.O., DEVIKULAM TALUK. 2. SR.AQUINA C.S.N.MORNING STAR MEDICAL CENTRE, ADIMALY P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT 3. THE ORIENTAL UNSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * M.A.C.A No.3154 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J Claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. They claim to be dependents - father, mother, brother and sister aged 55 years, 52 years, 26 years and 24 years respectively of the deceased. The deceased suffered injuries in a motor accident on 17/01/2007 and succumbed to the injuries. Compensation was claimed by the respondents. The tribunal allowed the claim in part and awarded a total amount of Rs.4,80,000/- as per the details given below: Schedule Part I Rs. Loss of dependency 4,40,000/- Damages to clothing 15,000/- Funeral expense 10,000/- Part II Loss of love and affection 10,000/- Loss of estate 5,000/- Total 4,80,000/- M.A.C.A No.3154/09 2 2. Compensation was directed to be paid along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and cost. 3. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned award. What is their grievance? The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the loss of dependency assessed at Rs.4,40,000/- is not fair, just and reasonable. The deceased was getting a monthly income of Rs.6,000/-, it is urged. Only Rs.5,000/- was reckoned by the tribunal as the monthly income of the deceased. 1/3rd was reduced by way of personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased was aged 22 years. Claimants - father and mother are of the age group of 50-55 years. The tribunal reckoned the multiplier at 11 which is the multiplier applicable to persons of the age group 51-55 as per column 5 of the table in Sarla Verma v. D.T.C [(2009)6 SCC 121]. It is accordingly that the tribunal arrived at the figure of Rs.4,40,000/- [Rs.5,000 x 12x 2/3 x 11]. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the deceased was aged 22 years and going by the dictum in Sarla (Supra) 18 must have been reckoned as the multiplier. We are unable to accept this contention. When older dependents are claiming compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles M.A.C.A No.3154/09 3 Act for the death of a younger person, on whom they depend, the multiplier realistically is to be fixed on the basis of the age of the claimants and not the deceased. The tribunal, according to us, committed no error in reckoning 11 applicable to persons of the age group 51-55 as the multiplier in the case of the claimants. 5. We must also note that contrary to the stipulations in Sarla (Supra), 1/3rd alone has been deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased was a young man, unmarried and aged about 22 years. ½ the income must safely have been deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased and the dependency of the parents could only have been reckoned at ½ his earnings. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that no provision is made by the tribunal for future prospects of the deceased. He was a young man and was likely to have improved his earnings in the years to come. Here also, we take note of the observations in Sarla (Supra) which says that for persons above the age of 50 years, increase in future prospects need not be taken into account. In any view of the matter, the tribunal having awarded an amount of Rs.4,40,000/- as per details shown above as compensation for loss of dependency, we are satisfied that the impugned award M.A.C.A No.3154/09 4 does not warrant interference. The amount fixed, we are satisfied, can safely be assumed to be just and reasonable compensation for the claimants. 6. This M.A.C.A is accordingly dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge M.A.C.A No.3154/09 5 M.A.C.A No.3154/09 6 R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009