IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 52 of 2006() ------------------ OPMV.1019/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA ................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS. ----------------------------------------- 1. ALEYKUTTY, S/O.MATHEW, KALOORMATTOM HOUSE, PARAKKADAVU KARA, KATTAPPANA. 2. JOSEPH @ BINOY, S/O.MATHEW DO. DO. 3. BINEESH, S/O.MATHEW (MINOR). DO. DO. BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS. ----------------------------------------------- 1. VARGHESE @ BAIJU, S/O.THOMAS, PARAYIL HOUSE, RAJAKANDOM KARA, ANAKKARA VILLAGE. 2. ASOKAN, MATHAPPARAMBIL, VADAKKUMURY KARIMKUNNAM, THODUPUZHA. 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., THODUPUZHA. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH R3 BY ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY , SC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK R.BASANT & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: & M.A.C.A No.52 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011 ORDER/JUDGMENT BASANT,J. C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: This petition is to condone the delay of 515 days in filing the appeal. We take a lenient view. Petition allowed. Delay condoned. M.A.C.A No.52 of 2006: Claimants are the appellants. They are the wife, major son and minor son of the deceased. The deceased suffered injuries in a road traffic accident on 14.11.1999 and succumbed to those injuries on the same date. Against the claim of Rs.5,50,000/-, the Tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.1,78,750/- as per the details shown below: 1. Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000/- 2. Funeral expenses : Rs. 2,000/- 3. Damage to clothing : Rs. 250/- 4.Transport to hospital : Rs. 500/- C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: & M.A.C.A No.52 OF 2006 2 5.Loss of love and affection: Rs.10,000/- 6. Loss of consortium : Rs. 5,000/- 7.Loss of dependency : Rs.1,56,000/-(1500x2/3x12x13) ------------------- Total Rs.1,78,750/- ========= 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the third respondent. 3. The impugned award is assailed by the learned counsel for the appellant on the short ground that the quantum of compensation awarded under the head of loss of dependency, loss of love and affection and consortium are not just, fair and reasonable. It is further argued that the interest awarded at 6% per annum is too low. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant first of all contends that the deceased was a person aged about 45 years. A family of four, including the deceased were keeping body and soul together on the income derived by him. According to the claimants, the deceased was running a service station. No better evidence in support of that assertion or the income derived there from is produced. The Tribunal appears to have drawn the presumption of prudence that the monthly income would not have been below C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: & M.A.C.A No.52 OF 2006 3 Rs.1,500/-/. The learned counsel contends that not withstanding the inability/failure of the appellants to produce precise and authentic documents about the income, the Tribunal should not have thrown its hands up and abdicated its responsibility to award compensation which is fair, reasonable and just. According to the learned counsel, in the facts and circumstances of this case, it will be absolutely reasonable to assume that the monthly income of the deceased could not have been below Rs.3,000/-. The learned counsel wants to point out the statutory recognition that the monthly income of even a non earning person can be Rs.15,000/- per annum as per Clause 6 of Schedule 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Taking all the relevant circumstances in to account, we agree with the counsel that the income should have been reckoned higher. We reckon Rs.2,250/- as the probable monthly income. In the absence of better material, we are unable to accept the learned counsel's request for acceptance of any higher amount. We take note that the accident had taken place as early as in 1999. Under the head of loss of amenities and loss of love and affection and loss of consortium Rs.15,000/- has been awarded. Considering the age of the deceased and age of the C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: & M.A.C.A No.52 OF 2006 4 claimants including the young wife and the third claimant minor daughter born on 11.7.1982, we are satisfied that Rs.15,000/- each can be awarded under the heads of compensation for loss of love and affection and loss of consortium. 5. We do further agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that interest should have been awarded at a higher rate. We agree that interest must be paid at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim to the date of payment. 6. The above discussion leads to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to the following further amount as compensation in addition to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal: 1. Loss of love and affection: Rs.5,000/-(15000 minus 10000) 2.Loss of consortium : Rs.10,000/-(15000 minus 5000) 3. Loss of dependency : Rs.78,000/- (Rs.2250x12x2/3x13 minus Rs.1,56,000/-) -------------------- Total Rs.93,000/- ======== In the result: a. This appeal is allowed in part. b. In addition to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are found entitled to a C.M.Appl.No.64 of 2006: & M.A.C.A No.52 OF 2006 5 further amount of Rs.93,000/-(Rupees ninety three thousand only) as shown above. c. It is made clear that interest shall be payable at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim to the date of payment on the entire amount of compensation. d. All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld. R.BASANT, JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE mns