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 PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 670 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.598/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 4 TO 8. --------------------------------------------------------- 1. SMT.MADHAVI, W/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, KOIMAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, PAZHUVIL P.O. THRISSUR. 2. VIDHYA SAGAR, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 3. MOHANDAS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 4. KUMARAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 5. PRASANNAKUMARI, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 6. SUBRAMANIAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 7. SHEELA, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 8. SAROJAM, S/O.LATE VIDHYA SAGAR, DO. DO. 9. GREESHMA (MINOR), S/O.LATE VIDHYA SAGAR, DO. DO. 10. CHANDRAPALAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 11. GOPINATHAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 12. JAYA SINGH, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. 13. INDIRA, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. MACA.NO.670/05 14. MANOHARAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3. ---------------------------------- 1. G.VELMURUGHAN, S/O.GOVINDA RAJ, 28, PILLAYARKOVIL STREET, VELLUR 4. 2. R.SEKHAR, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, BSC.NO.1. HOUSING BOARD, VELLUR, NEAR MURUGHA THEATRE, ARATHAT, VELUR -9. 3. M/S.THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH VELLUR, TAMIL NADU. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) 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.670 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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.598/1995 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda challenges the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 12, 2002 awarding a compensation of Rs. 56,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of Sri.Velayudhan in a motor accident. 2. The facts in brief are these : Claimants 1 to 7 are the wife and children of deceased Velayudhan. As second claimant died, his wife and minor daughter were impleaded as claimants 8 and 9. Deceased Velayudhan was aged 70 and was a farmer, according to the claimants. On August 4, 1994 at about 4 p.m., deceased Velayudhan was travelling in a car bearing Reg.No.KL 8B 292 from Ernakulam to Thrissur. When the car reached Nellayi junction, a lorry bearing Reg.No.TN 23/1647 came at a high speed from the northern side and MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers dashed against a tempo van bearing Reg.No.KRR 689 which was parked on the western side of the road. After hitting the tempo, the lorry hit against the car in which the deceased was travelling. The deceased as well as other passengers in the car sustained serious injuries. He succumbed to the injuries sustained on October 23, 1994 while undergoing treatment in his house. According to the claimants, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing Reg.No. TN 23/1647 by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver, third respondent as the insurer of the offending lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. The claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,39,000/-. 3. Claimants and respondents 4 to 8 in the O.P. are the legal heirs of the deceased. Respondents 4 to 8 are working abroad. Therefore, they are shown as respondents. Respondents 1 , 5 and 7 were absent and were set ex parte . Respondents 2, 4 and 6 did not file any written statement before the Tribunal . Third respondent, the insurer, filed a written statement admitting the policy, but denying the MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers liability. 4. Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimants. Exts.B1 was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. 5. On an appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 56,000/-. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 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, the driver of the offending lorry is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation ? 7. The Tribunal awarded compensation as follows : Loss of dependency -Rs. 24,000/- Pain and suffering -Rs. 5,000/- Loss of consortium -Rs. 5000/- Funeral expenses -Rs. 4,000/- Medical expenses -Rs. 18,000/- ----------------- Rs. 56,000/- ========== MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers 8. Counsel for the appellant argued that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for loss of dependency is very low and that the income of the deceased should have been fixed at Rs. 1500/- per month. 9. There is force in the above contention. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 1000/- and adopted a multiplier of 5 and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses awarded a compensation of Rs. 24000/- for loss of dependency. The deceased was aged 70 at the time of the accident. According to the claimants, he was a farmer . Taking into consideration all these aspects, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased should have been taken by the Tribunal as Rs. 1500/-. After deducting Rs. 500/- towards his personal expenses, remaining Rs. 1000/- can be taken as his monthly contribution to his family The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 5 is not disputed by the claimants. The deceased was aged 70 at the time of the accident. Therefore, we feel that the multiplier of 5 adopted by the Tribunal is reasonable. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers of Rs. 60,000/- ( Rs. 1000 x 12 x 5). Thus the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 36,000/- on this count. 10. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 5000/- for pain and suffering and Rs. 5000/- for loss of consortium, Rs. 4000/- for Funeral expenses and Rs. 18,000/- for medical expenses. Taking into consideration the fact that the accident occurred on 04/08/1994 and the deceased died on 23/10/1994, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15000/- would be adequate for pain and suffering endured by the deceased. 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 5000/- for loss of consortium . Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the age of the claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus he is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 5000/- on this count. 12. Counsel for the appellants pointed out that no compensation was awarded for loss of estate of the deceased. It is settled law that in the case of a death of an individual in a motor accident, the dependents are entitled to compensation for loss to the estate. Therefore, in the present case also the claimants are entitled to MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers compensation for the loss to the estate. Taking into account the age of the deceased, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 5000/- would be reasonable on this count. 13. Thus the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.56,000/- They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. Third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the claimants. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.670/05 Page numbers