IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 907 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.297/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------- 1. M.T.KUNHIMOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHANDERA IN PILICODE VILLAGE OF HOSDURG TALUK, P.O. MANIYAT. 2. A.G.BEEFATHIMMA, AGED 39 YEARS, WIFE OF M.T.P.KUNHIMOIDEEN KUTTY, RESIDING AT CHANDERA IN PILICODE VILLAGE OF HOSDURG TALUK, P.O. MANIYAT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. C.K. VISHWANATHA, S/O. APPU NAIR, P.C. 688, A.R. CAMP, KASARAGOD, CHEREEVATTAKKAVU- TEETTIL, PADIYOTU CHAL, KANNUR DIST. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KASARAGOD P.O., KASARAGOD. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., P.B.NO.17, M.G. ROAD, KASARAGOD. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.907 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)297/1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kasargod. They are the parents of deceased Sameer who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal, dated June 28,2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,99,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in that accident. 2. On February 10, 1997, while the deceased was walking along the road at Nileshwar, he was knocked down by the police jeep bearing Reg.No.KL-14A/2484 driven by the first respondent. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Alleging negligence against the driver of the jeep, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. MACA.No.907/2005 2 3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending jeep filed written statement admitting the accident, but denied the liability. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy of the jeep. 4. Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. Exts.B1 to B3 were marked on the side of the contesting respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the first respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,99,000/- with interest at the rate of 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 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 driver of the jeep is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only MACA.No.907/2005 3 question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,99,000/- The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: Transportation - Rs. 3,000/- Funeral expenses - Rs. 5,000/- Pain and suffering - Rs.10,000/- Treatment expenses - Rs.22,000/- Loss of dependency - Rs.1,44,000/- Loss of expectation of life & loss of love and affection - Rs. 15,000/- 8. The counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation for loss of dependency and for loss of love and affection. He pointed out that no compensation was awarded for loss of estate. 9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- and took the monthly contribution to his family as Rs. 1,000/- per month which comes to Rs.12,000/- per annum and adopted a multiplier of 12 and awarded Rs. 1,44,000/- for the loss of dependency. Deceased was aged 28 and unmarried and was attending MACA.No.907/2005 4 Radio and Television course in the Institute of Engineering as evidenced by Ext.A7, the certificate issued from that institute. Taking into consideration the fact that he would have been gainfully employed after completing his course, we feel that the monthly income of Rs. 3,000/- fixed by the Tribunal is reasonable. The Tribunal took the monthly contribution to his family as Rs. 1,000/- which appears to be very low. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs.2,000/- can be taken as his monthly contribution to his family which comes to Rs. 24,000/- per annum. The claimants are his parents aged 45 and 35. Therefore, the proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case is 16. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,84000/- ( 24,000 x 16). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,40,000/-. 10. For loss of love and affection, Rs. 15,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal which appears to be quite inadequate. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- would be reasonable on this count. Thus, on this count, the MACA.No.907/2005 5 claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 11. No compensation was seen awarded for loss of estate. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same. 12. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 2,55,000/-. 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.907/2005 6 MACA.No.907/2005 7