IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 93 of 2003(C) ---------------------- OPMV.264/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. GEORGE, S/O. THOMAS, AGED 61 YEARS, KANDATHIN KARA, VETTIKUZHA KAVALA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, UDUMBENCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. LILLIKUTTY, W/O. JOSEMON, AGED 33 YEARS, VADAKKETH HOUSE, KALTHOTTI P.O., LABBAKKADA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. VALSAMMA, W/O. JOHNY, AGED 31 YEARS, CHERUVIL HOUSE, THOVALA P.O., MANNAMKUZHY, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 4. ALICE, W/O. SAJU, AGED 29, KADEEKUNNEL, BALAL P.O., PARAPPU, KASARAGOD. 5. JOSE, S/O. GEORGE, AGED 27 YEARS, KANDATHINKARA HOUSE, VETTIKUZHA KAVALA, KATTAPPANA P.O., UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 6. SEENA, D/O. GEOREGE, AGED 23, KANDATHINKARA HOUSE, VETTIKUZHA KAVALA -DO- -DO-. 7. RANI, D/O. GEORGE, AGED 22 YEARS, -DO- -DO-. 8. SHEEBA, D/O. GEORGE, -DO- -DO-. 9. PRINCY, D/O. GEORGE, AGED 15 (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND GEORGE THOMAS -DO- -DO-. BY ADV. SMT.LEELAMMA GEORGE ABRAHAM Kss ...2/- ...2..... MACA.NO.93/2003 RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. FRANCIS JOSEPH, MYLADOOR HOUSE, EDAVETTY P.O., THODUPUZHA. 2. SANTHOSH KUMAR K., KALLUVATTUMKUZHYIL, KATTAPPANA. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM SRI.M.A.HAKIM SHAH FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ================================ M.A.C.A.No.93 of 2003 - C =============================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T KOSHY, J. Wife of the 1st appellant sustained fatal injuries in an accident occurred on 6.3.1998 due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle insured by the 3rd respondent. He claimed an amount of Rs.4,43,500/- limited to Rs.4,00,000/-. Tribunal found that there was valid insurance coverage to vehicle at the time of accident issued by the 3rd respondent-insurance company and awarded an amount of Rs.1,05,500/-. The only dispute raised in this appeal is regarding the quantum of compensation. The husband and children of the motor accident victim filed application for compensation. Tribunal has taken 10 as the multiplier. Considering the age of the deceased (56), only 8 can be taken as multiplier. It is submitted that the Tribunal has taken Rs.1,500/- as monthly income. At least Rs.2,500/- ought to have taken as monthly income. It has been held by the Honourable Supreme Court that services of a house wife are not M.A.C.A.No.93 of 2003 - C 2 valueless. She was nurturing a large family. We are of the view that at least Rs.2,500/- should have been fixed as monthly income and if that be so, Rs.30,000/- is the yearly income and Rs.20,000/- will be the yearly loss of dependency. As per the 2nd schedule 8 is the multiplier. If that be so, compensation of loss of dependency will be Rs.1,60,000/-. Rs.80,000/- was only granted by the Tribunal for loss of dependency. Therefore additional compensation payable will be Rs.80,000/-. The additional compensation of Rs.80,000/- over and above the decreed amount awarded by the Tribunal, should be deposited by the 3rd respondent-insurance company with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of application till deposit. On deposit of the same, the appellants are allowed to withdraw the same in equal share. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE bkn/-