IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 609 of 2007(A) ----------------------- OPMV.68/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- 1. NALINI PREMACHANDRAN,AGED 41,W/O.LATE KEERTHIYIL PREMACHANDRAN. 2. SAARIKA P.CHANDRAN,D/O.LATE KEERTHIYIL PREMACHANDRAN,AGED 20 YEARS. 3. SAALINI P.CHANDRAN,D/O.LATE KEERTHIYIL PREMACHANDRAN,AGED 12 YEARS,(MINOR REP.BY GUARDIAN MOTHER IST RESPONDENT). 4. PARUKUTTY AMMA,AGED 86 YEARS,W/O.LATE KUNHAN NAIR,KEERTHIYIL. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THENATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MEETACHI ROAD,MANJAKUPPADAM,CUDDALORE,CUDDALORE DISTRICT.(INSURER OF LORRY TN-31C-6486,POLICY NO. 501503/31/03/6300710,POLICY VALID FROM 15.9.2003 TO 14.5.2004). BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. NO: 609 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th Day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT K. M. Joseph J. The appellants are widow, two minor children and the mother of the deceased, who died as a result of injuries sustained in a motor accident. They are aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is wrong. 4. She also pointed out that the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6% is low. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance company supported the award. M.A.C.A . NO: 609 OF 2007 :2: 6. The Tribunal has proceeded to consider the age of the applicants and ultimately awarded the compensation only taking the multiplier as 8. The reason for adopting the multiplier as 8 is that there was low rate of interest for the bank deposit and spiraling up of the prices. The income was taken at Rs.4,500/- by the Tribunal. Out of that 1/3rd was deducted towards personal expenses. It is clear that in view of the age of deceased, the multiplier to be adopted is 11 when considering the age of widow of the deceased. We note that the daughters of the deceased, were aged 17 and 9 respectively, and of course, the mother was aged 83 at the time of the petition. In view of the fact, that the number of dependents is 4, we feel the dependency should be 1/4th and not 1/3rd, as per the decision in Sarla Verma and Others V. Delhi Transportation Corporation & Another (2009 ACJ 1298). On this basis the appellants would be entitled to realise an amount of Rs.4,45,500/- in place of Rs.2,88,000/- and hence the appellants are entitled to for an amount of Rs.1,57,500/-. We note that there is merit in the contention that M.A.C.A . NO: 609 OF 2007 :3: the rate of interest is low and we enhance rate of interest from 6% to 7.5% on the amount already awarded. Accordingly this appeal is allowed and the appellants are allowed to realise an amount of Rs.1,57,500/- along with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realisation from the third respondent. The amount already awarded by the Tribunal also will bear interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realisation. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE dl/