IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2009 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 949 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.1253/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------- 1. LEELAMMA, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT LINCY LAND, PONGALADI MURI, PANDALAM, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. LINCY, AGED 21 YEARS (MINOR) RESIDING AT LINCY LAND, PONGALADI MURI, PANDALAM, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. LINTO, AGED 11 YEARS, (MINOR) RESIDING AT LINCY LAND, PONGALADI MURI, PANDALAM, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. THANKAMMA OOMMEN, AGED 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONATT KIZHAKKEKARA, PONGALADI, PARANTHAL. (MOTHER OF THE DECEASED). 5. MOLLY CHERIAN, D/O. OOMMEN RESIDING AT MALAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PUNNALA P.O., PATHANAPURAM. 6. JOSE, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. OOMMEN, RESIDING AT JOSE VILLA POZHIKAD P.O., PANDALAM. 7. SUSI JOY, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT BETTY BHAVAN, POZHIKKAD P.O., PANDALAM. -: 2 :- 8. SAJI OOMMEN, AGED 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT SAJI VILLA, PARANTHAL P.O., PANDALAM. 9. JIJI K.O., AGED 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT ANJELVALI, PARANTHAL P.O., PANDALAM. 10. AJI OOMMEN, AGED 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONATTU KIZHAKKEKARA, PARANTHAL P.O., PANDALAM, (APPELLANTS 5 TO 10 ARE THE LEGAL HEIRS OF ADDITIONAL PERITIONER 4 IN THE O.P.) BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. VIJAYAN, S/O. PARAMESWARAN, RANDALUMMOOTTIL, PONGALADI, PARANTHAL P.O., PANDALAM, THEKKEKARA. 2. FAZEL HAQUE, KAKKAKUZHIKIZHAKKETHIL, THONNALLOR P.O., PANDALAM. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., T.M. BUILDING, BANK ROAD, KAYAMKULAM. ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. They claimed compensation for the loss suffered on account of the death of the deceased who suffered injuries in a motor accident and succumbed to those injuries on the date of the accident itself i.e., 7/10/97. The claimants are the wife, two minor children and parents of the deceased. Father of the deceased expired during the pendency of the proceedings. His legal heirs have joined the other claimants. An amount of Rs.8 lakhs was claimed as compensation. The deceased was aged 37 years. He was a Welder/Steel fixer employed in Saudi Arabia. He was allegedly earning an income of 1300 Saudi Riyals as borne out from Ext.A12 salary certificated issued by his employer abroad. The M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 -: 2 :- claimant/wife was aged 30 years at the time of the accident. The minor children were aged 13 years and 3 ½ years. The parents were aged 65 years and 60 years on the date of the death of the deceased. 2. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced. Ext.P12 salary certificate was produced. 3. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, came to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled for a total amount of Rs.3,01,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum as per the details shown below: 1. Transport to hospital and funeral expenses - Rs.7,500/- 2. Loss of consortium - Rs.10,000/- 3. Loss of love and affection - Rs.10,000/- 4. Loss of estate - Rs.10,000/- 5. Pain and suffering - Rs.7,500/- 6. Loss of dependency (2000 x 12 x 2/3 x 16) - Rs.2,56,000/- ------------------- Total - Rs.3,01,000/- ======== 4. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 -: 3 :- award. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the appellants want to mount against the impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellants contends, first of all, that the amounts awarded under the heads of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection are too low. Considering the age of the spouse and the age of the minor children and the parents, higher amounts ought to have have been awarded under these heads, it is contended. 5. The main plank of challenge is the multiplicand reckoned by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had accepted that the deceased was employed abroad. Ext.A12 salary certificate shows the monthly income of the deceased at 1300 Saudi Riyals – an Indian equivalent of which would be roughly Rs.14,000/- at the relevant time. In any view of the matter, considering the employment of the deceased as Welder/Steel fixer abroad reasonably higher amount of multiplicand must have been taken by the Tribunal, contends the learned counsel for the appellants. 6. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, we find merit in the challenge raised by the learned counsel for the appellants. We are satisfied, in the circumstances of this case, M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 -: 4 :- that it would be absolutely safe to reckon Rs.3,000/- as the multiplicand applicable. In coming to this conclusion, we note that the accident had taken place as early as in 1997. We take note of the reality that the deceased may not have continued abroad for the entire period of 16 years adopted as multiplier. It is, in these circumstances, that we reckon the multiplicand at Rs.3,000/- per mensem. 7. We are satisfied that the amounts awarded under the heads of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection deserve upward modification considering the totality of circumstances. 8. The above discussions lead us to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled for the following further amounts in addition to the amounts already awarded by the Tribunal: 1. Loss of consortium (Rs.20,000/- minus Rs.10,000/-) - Rs.10,000/- 2. Loss of love and affection (Rs.15,000/- minus Rs.5,000/-) - Rs.5,000/- 3. Loss of dependency (3000 x 12 x 2/3 x 16 i.e., (Rs.3,84,000/- minus Rs.2,56,000/-) - Rs.1,28,000/- ------------------- Total - Rs.1,43,000/- ======== M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 -: 5 :- 9. Needless to say, the entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate directed by the Tribunal from the date of the petition to the date of payment. 10. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. R. BASANT (Judge) C.T. RAVIKUMAR (Judge) Nan/ M.A.C.A. No. 949 of 2006 -: 6 :-