IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 854 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.239/1996 of ADDL. MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS. ------------------------------------- 1. KHADER, S/O.MOHAMMED, AGED 42 YEARS, NELLIKKAL KADU HOUSE, MANJALLOOR P.O. ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SALMA, W/O.KHADER, AGED 35 YEARS, NELLIKKAL KADU HOUSE, MANJALLOOR P.O. ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU SEBASTIAN VADAKKEKKARA SRI.BABY MATHEW SRI.BABY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. ARAVINDAKSHAN P.T. S/O.THEETHUNNI, AGED 35 YEARS, PALAKKEEZHU VEEDU, MUNDOOR P.O. PALAKKAD DISTRICT, DRIVER OF KL-15/1212, K.S.R.T.C. BUS. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC FOR R2 SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC FOR R2 SRI.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.854 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.239/1996 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 31st July, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 54,250/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of their minor son Muhammed in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these : The claimants are the parents of deceased boy Muhammed who was studying in the third standard at that time. On March 28, 1995 at about 12.30 in the noon, the deceased was returning from his school. When he reached at Thottupalam on National Highway 47, a KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KL.15/1212 driven by the first respondent came at a high speed and knocked him down. Deceased Muhammed sustained serious injuries and died on the spot. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending MACA.No.854/05 2 bus by first respondent. First respondent as the driver and second respondent as the owner are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the father and mother of the deceased. Claimants claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. 3. First respondent, the driver of the offending vehicle filed a written statement contending that there was no negligence on his part. Second respondent, the Managing Director of KSRTC who is the owner of the offending vehicle filed a written statement disputing the liability. 4. Exts.A1 to A6 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by contesting respondents. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 54,250/-. 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 respondents. MACA.No.854/05 3 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first 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. 54250/-. The break up of the award amount is as under : Transportation -Rs. 1,000/- Damage to clothing -Rs. 250/- Loss on account of the death of the child -Rs. 50,000/- Pain and suffering -Rs. 3,000/- ---------------- Total -Rs. 54, 250/- ========= 8. Deceased boy was aged about 7. Even going by the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, the probable income of the non-earning has to be taken as Rs. 15,000/- per annum and a multiplier of 15 has to be taken. Taking into consideration that aspect, we feel that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very low. We are of the view that a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- as claimed by the claimants would be reasonable in this case. MACA.No.854/05 4 In the result, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 95,750/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The second respondent being the owner of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Appeal is allowed with cost. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.854/05 5