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 18TH AUGUST 2010 / 27TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 1693 of 2006(D) ----------------------- OPMV.310/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANTS-PETITIONER ---------------------------------- 1. LATHA, W/O.LATE BABU, AGED 28 YEARS, KARIPPATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KUNCHITHANNI P.O., ADIMALY. 2. BALU, S/O.LATE BABU (MINOR), DO. DO., AGED 2 1/2 YEARS, REP. BY HIS MOTHER LATHA, W/O.LATE BABU, DO. DO. 3. LAVANYA, D/O.LATE BABU (MINOR), AGED 1 1/2 YEARS, DO. DO., REP. BY HER MOTHER LATHA, W/O.LATE BABU, RESIDING AT DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. RAGHAVAN, VELIKKUZHIYIL, HOUSE NO.161/III, VELLATHOOVAL, IDUKKI. 2. V.R.SHAJI, VELIKKUZHIYIL, 20 ACRE KARA, BYSONVALLEY VILLAGE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BANK JUNCTION, ALUVA. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. 1693 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: AUGUST 18, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV) 310/2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha. They are the wife and two minor children of deceased Babu who died in a motor accident that occurred on March 12, 2003. The accident happened while the jeep bearing Regn.No.KL 5B.3404 in which the deceased Babu along with the petitioners were travelling capsized at about 11.15 p.m. at Njeerippalam near N.R.City into a ravine on the side of the road. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment in the hospital. The deceased was aged 28 at the time of the accident and was an agriculturist-cum-TV mechanic earning Rs.6000/- per month. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, driver of the jeep, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.5 lakhs. 2. Respondents 1 and 2, owner and driver of the offending jeep, remained absent before the Tribunal. Respondent No.3, insurer of the jeep, filed a written statement admitting the policy, but contended that the 2nd respondent had no driving licence at the time of the accident. M.A.C.A. of 200 2 3. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A22 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. The driving licence of the 2nd respondent was marked as Ext.B1 and copy of the policy as Ext.B2 on the side of the respondents. Thia OP was jointly tried along with other OPs. filed by other injured persons in the accident and a common award was passed. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the 2nd respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,18,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Heard counsel for the appellants/claimants and the Insurance Company. 5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd 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. 6. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under: loss of dependency Rs.2,87,928/- loss of consortium 10,000/- loss of love and affection 10,000/- transportation and funeral expenses 5,000/- M.A.C.A. of 200 3 pain and suffering 5,000/- ------------------------- 3,17,928/- rounded off 3,18,000/- ============== 7. The Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation awarded for the loss of dependency, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2000/- which comes to Rs.24000/- per annum and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, took the balance amount of Rs.16000/- as his annual contribution to his family and adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded Rs.2,87,928/- towards loss of dependency. The specific case of the claimants is that the deceased was a TV mechanic and used to earn Rs.6000/- per month. PW.2 was examined to prove the same. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs.3000/- which comes to Rs.36000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs.24000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. The multiplier adopted as 18 is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated, for the loss of dependency the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,32,000/-. Thus on this count the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,44,072/-. 8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium and M.A.C.A. of 200 4 Rs.10,000/- for loss of love and affection. Taking into consideration the young age of the widow, we feel that a compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be reasonable towards loss of consortium. Having regard to the tender age of the children, we feel that a compensation of Rs.25,000/- would be reasonable towards loss of love and affection. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same. 9. Thus the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,69,072/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and for the enhanced compensation and proportionate cost. The 3rd 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 mt/-