IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1929 MACA.No. 173 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.4120/1993 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 1 TO 9: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. C.A.KUNHUMUHAMMED, S/O.KUNHAIN, AGED 70 YEARS. 2. SABIRA, W/O.ABDULLAKKUTTY, AGED 42 YEARS. 3. C.A.ABIDA, W/O.RAZAK, AGED 40 YEARS. 4. C.A.SADIQ ALI, S/O.KUNHU MUHAMMED, AGED 36 YEARS. 5. C.A.ANWAR, S/O.KUNHI MUHAMMED, AGED 36 YEARS. 6. C.A.HAJIRA, W/O.SUBAIR, AGED 33 YEARS 7. C.A.HAFZA, W/O.ABDUL KALAM. 8. C.A.SHAREEFA, D/O.KUNHU MUHAMMED, AGED 27 YEARS. 9. C.A.SHAFEEQUE, S/O.KUNHU MUHAMMED, AGED 27 YEARS, ALL APPELLANTS ARE RESIDING AT VELLANCHERY HOUSE, VAZHAKKADU P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM Kss ..2/- RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.HUSSAIN, S/O.MUHAMMED, KURUPPATH HOUSE, CHERUVAYUR, P.O.VAZHAKKADU, MALAPPURAM DT. 2. K.BHASKARAN, S/O.KANDAN, AGED 28 YEARS, ELAMARAM, CHERUVAYUR, P.O.VAZHAKKADU, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK BUILDING, MALAPPURAM. R3 BY ADV. SRI.E.R.VENKATESWARAN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B. Koshy & K.Hema, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.173 of 2003 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. Husband and eight children of a motor accident victim filed an application for compensation for Rs.Two lakhs contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the third respondent insurance company. Tribunal accepted the above contention, but, total compensation granted was only Rs.85,500/- with interest. Only dispute is regarding quantum of compensation. It was contended that even though age of the deceased was stated as 42 in the treatment certificate, in the application it is stated that the age of the deceased as 53. Husband was aged 63 at the time of the accident. The tribunal accepted that the deceased was aged 53 at the time of accident, but, taken only 5 as the multiplier. Taking guidance from the second schedule, we are of the view that the tribunal ought to have fixed at least 11 as the multiplier. The tribunal fixed notional income as Rs.10,000/= as she was only a house wife. But, she was doing all the household work of a large family consisting of eight M.A.C.A.No. 173/2003 2 children and her husband. It was argued that the services of a house cannot be under-estimated. In Latha Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others ((2001) 8 SCC 197), a three-member Bench of the Supreme Court held that in the absence of data, Rs.3,000/- can be taken as the monthly income for the services of a house wife. Here, the accident occurred in 1993. In the second schedule, notional income of a non-earning person including a minor was fixed as Rs.15,000/- per year. Therefore, we are of the view that at least Rs.15,000/- ought to have been taken as the annual notional income. One-third has to be deducted and Rs.10,000/- is the loss of family contribution. Therefore, compensation payable for the death and loss of dependency is Rs.1,10,000/- instead of Rs.50,000/- fixed by the tribunal. Therefore, claimants will be entitled to Rs.60,000/- more on that count. 2. Death was not instantaneous. She was first admitted to Koya's Hospital, Cheruvannoor on 15.6.1993 and from there to National Hospital and then to Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode and she succumbed to the injuries on 22.6.1993. She was administered with life saving medicines. Only Rs.1,000/- was awarded towards treatment expenses. She was taken from the place of accident to three hospitals by special transportation. Dead M.A.C.A.No. 173/2003 3 body had also to be transported to the house. Only Rs.500/- was awarded towards transportation charges. We are of the opinion that Rs.5,000/- more should be awarded for treatment and incidental expenses. Therefore, additional amount payable will be Rs.65,000/- over and above the amount decreed by the tribunal. Even though it was argued that compensation awarded for pain and suffering and other heads are very low, considering the total amount awarded, we are not interfering in the same. The above additional amount of Rs.65,000/- should be deposited by the third respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit. On deposit of the amount, 50% of the same is allowed to be withdrawn by the first appellant and balance in equal proportion by other respondents. The appeal is allowed partly. J.B.Koshy Judge K. Hema Judge vaa M.A.C.A.No. 173/2003 4 M.A.C.A.No. 173/2003 5 J.B. KOSHY AND K.HEMA ,JJ. ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 173 of 2003 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:20th February, 2008