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 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 381 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.283/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------ 1. THANKAMANI AMMA, W/O.LATE KARUNAKARAN PILLAI, KOMMANCHERI VEEDU, NEENDAKARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT ( DELETED) 2. JALAJA, D/O.LATE KARUNAKARAN PILLAI, KOMANCHERI VEEDU, NEENDAKARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.NOOR MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. RONALD J. DENNISON, S/O.THOMAS, KURICHI PARAMBIL, KATHRIKADAVU P.O., COCHIN-17. 2. BABU T., S/O.THOMAS, ODAKKAL PARAMBIL, NEDUMKANDAM. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGER, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. ( RESPONDENT NO.1 DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 17-6-2010 IN I.A.NO.1391/2010) ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.381 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.283/1999 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kollam challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated March 24, 20003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,26,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Karunakaran Pillai in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : Deceased Karunakaran Pillai was aged 50 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs. 6,000/- per month as a Mason, according to the claimants. Claimants are his wife and daughter. On February 18, 1999 at about 2.30 p.m., deceased was cycling along Kollam- Alappuzha National Highway. At that time, he was knocked down by a Tata Sumo vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-7/V-943 driven by the second respondent. Deceased Karunakaran Pillai sustained serious injuries and MACA.No.381/2005 2 he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram on February 22, 1999. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending Tata Sumo vehicle by second respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the offending Tata Sumo vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the dependants and legal heirs of the deceased. Claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs. 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending vehicle remained absent before the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the policy. 4. First claimant as PW1 and another witness as PW2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A5 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the offending MACA.No.381/2005 3 Tata Sumo vehicle by second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,26,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company. 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 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 a total compensation of Rs.1,26,000/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under : Transportation expenses - Rs. 5,000/- Loss of consortium - Rs. 5,000/- Loss of love and affection - Rs.10,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs.10,000/- Loss of dependency - Rs.96,000/- 8. Counsel for the appellants/claimants sought enhancement MACA.No.381/2005 4 of compensation for the loss of dependency. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,500/- which works out to Rs. 18,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 12,000/- was taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 8 and awarded Rs. 96,000/- for the loss of dependency. PW1 testified that the deceased was working as a Mason which is not seriously disputed. Therefore, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,000/- which works out to Rs. 24,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 16,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 8. As the deceased was aged 50 at the time of the accident as testified by PW1, the proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case is 11. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 1,76,000/- ( 16,000 x 11). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.80,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be MACA.No.381/2005 5 reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 10. In the result, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 80,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent. The Appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.381/2005 6