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 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH FALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 319 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.466/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS: ------------------------- 1. M. PARUKUTTY, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O. P.MADHAVAN, RESIDING AT KODAKKAD, KUNNINKINATTUKARA, P.O. KODAKKAD,KODAKKAD VILLAGE. 2. P.MADHAVAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. THIRUMKAN, RESIDING AT KODAKKAD, KUNNINKINATTUKARA, P.O. KODAKKAD,KODAKKAD VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. P.C. MATHEW @ TOMY, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. CHERIYAN, PALAKKONIL HOUSE,THIRUMENI AMSOM, PRAPOIL, CHERUPUZHA P.O., CHITTARIKKAL VILLAGE. 2. S. SUDHA, W/O. KESHAVAN NAIR, SREEKRISHNAN VILASAM, PRAPOIL, CHERUPUZHA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., PAYYANNUR BRANCH, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN FOR R.2 SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.319 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.466/2004, who are the parents of deceased Sajma, challenges the judgment and award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kasargod dated May 23, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs. 155,500/- for the loss caused to the claimants on account of the death of the deceased in a motor accident, under Section 163 A of Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The facts in brief are these : On February 22, 2004 while deceased Sajma and her relatives were travelling in a jeep bearing Reg. No.KL 14A-9585 and reached at Prapoil at about 10.30 A.M., another jeep bearing Reg.No.KL 5C.8487 driven by the first respondent came at a high speed and dashed against the back side of the jeep in which the deceased was travelling. The deceased sustained severe injuries and she succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment at Pariyaram Medical College on MACA.No.319/2007 Page numbers February 24, 2004. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent, who is the driver of the jeep bearing Reg.No.KL.5C/8487 and the first respondent as the driver and second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the offending jeep are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending jeep filed a joint written statement contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the other jeep involved in the accident. The third respondent, Insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,55,500/-. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal MACA.No.319/2007 Page numbers that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep bearing Reg.No.KL 14 A-9585 by the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. It is also admitted that the deceased died as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore the only question for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 6. The O.P. was filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, compensation has to be granted to the claimants on the basis of the structured formula in Schedule II of Motor Vehicles Act. The deceased was a minor girl aged 15 and that the claimants are her legal heirs. Exts.A2 is the copy of the postmortem certificate and Ext.A4 is the legal heirship certificate which prove the above aspects. The court has fixed the annual income of the deceased at Rs. 15000/-. The Tribunal deducted 1/3 from this and took the monthly contribution to her family as Rs. 10,000/- and adopted a multiplier of 15 as provided under the II schedule of Motor Vehicles Act. It is common knowledge that even as a coolie, a person will get Rs. 100/- per day. The Supreme Court has held that even the monthly income of a house wife can be taken as Rs. 3000/-. Therefore, we feel MACA.No.319/2007 Page numbers that the monthly income of the deceased can be easily taken as Rs. 2500/- which comes to Rs. 30,000/- per annum. The counsel for appellant produced copy of Legal heirship certificate which shows that the deceased is the only child of claimants. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal is justified in adopting a multiplier of 15 as provided under the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. Applying the multiplier of 15, the total amount works out to Rs.4,50,000/-. After deducting 1/3 towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the loss of dependency works out at Rs. 3,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- towards loss of dependency. Therefore, under this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. 7. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 2000/- for funeral expenses, Rs. 2500/- for the loss of estate and Rs. 1000/- towards treatment expenses as provided under the Second Schedule of the Act. 8. For treatment expenses, only Rs. 1000/- was awarded by the Tribunal. Taking into account the fact that the deceased was in the hospital for about two days, we feel that towards treatment expenses, a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be fair and proper. Thus on this MACA.No.319/2007 Page numbers count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.9,000/-. In the result, the appellants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,59,000/-. The third respondent, insurer, shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 9% from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate costs. The Award is modified to the above effect. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.319/2007 Page numbers