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 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 MACA.No. 1540 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.766/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS: ------------------------------------ 1. DILSHAD K. @ C.H. DILSHADA, W/O. LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN C.,D/O.KUNHU,AGED 21 YEARS DILSHADA MANZIL, KAMBITHOON, P.O. SHANKARANELLUR. 2. MUHAMMED AFNAD C.H., S/O. LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN C., AGED 2 YEARS (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY MOTHER DILSHAD K. @ DILSHADA, DILSHADA MANZIL, KAMBITHOON, P.O. SHANKARANELLUR. 3. FATHIMATH SHAHANA C.H., S/O. LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN C.,AGED 1 YEAR (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY MOTHER DILSHAD K. @C.H.DILSHADA, DILSHADA MANZIL, KAMBITHOON, P.O. SHANKARANELLUR. 4. PILACHERI ABDU, S/O. KHADER, AGED 70 YEARS, K.P. HOUSE, PACHAPOIKA P.O. 5. NAFEESA C.K., W/O. PILACHERI ABDU, AGED 65 YEARS, K.P. HOUSE, PACHAPOIKA P.O. BY ADV. MR.C.KHALID MR.N.GOPINATHA PANICKER MR.R.O.MUHAMED SHEMEEM MR.T.P.SAJID RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. A. PADMINI, W/O.BALAKRISHNAN, "REENA NIVAS", P.O. SHANKARANELLUR,KUTHUPARAMBA. 2. N.V. RAJEEVAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, KALATT HOUSE, P.O. PATHIRIYAD. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., KANNUR. ADV. MR.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 MR.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. =========================== M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 ================= Dated this the 18th day of May 2010 J U D G M E N T Barkath Ali, J: In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act claimants in O.P.(MV) No. 766 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated December 1, 2005, awarding a compensation of Rs.6,58,000/- for the loss caused to the claimants, on account of the death of Abdul Rahiman in a motor accident. 2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:- The deceased Abdul Rahiman was aged 29 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.7,500/- per month as an L.I.C. Agent as well as a fish monger. On February 2, 2001 at about 6.45a.m. the deceased was riding his M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -2- motor cycle bearing Registration No.KL-13C/7924 along Chakkarakkal to Shankaranellur road, when he reached at Ancharakkandy Bridge a bus bearing Registration No.KRN 4028 driven by the 2nd respondent came at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment at Dhanalakshmi Hospital, Kannur on the next day. The 1st claimant is the widow, the 2nd and 3rd claimants are the minor children and 4th and 5th claimants are the parents of the deceased. The 1st respondent as the owner, 2nd respondent driver and the 3rd respondent Insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the dependents and legal heirs of the deceased. The claimants claimed a compensation of Rs.13,50,000/-. 3. The respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending bus remained absent and were set M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -3- ex parte by the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent, the Insurer of the offending bus filed written statement admitting the policy and further contending that accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. The 1st claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A14 were marked on their side. The copy of the Insurance Policy was marked as Ext.B1 on the side of 3rd respondent. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.6,58,000/-. The claimants have come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants/appellants and the learned 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 2nd respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -4- consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,58,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Loss of estate : Rs.5000/- Consortium to the 1st petitioner : Rs.10,000/- Pain and sufferings : Rs.10,000/- Compensation for loss of love and affection : Rs.15,000/- Medical expense : Rs.2,000/- Transportation expense : Rs.2,000/- Funeral expense : Rs.2,000/- Loss of dependency : Rs.6,12,000/- ------------------- Total : Rs.6,58,000/- ======== 8. The learned counsel for the Claimants sought enhancement of the compensation for the loss of dependency. The deceased was aged 29 at the time of accident. Ext.A4, the copy of his S.S.L.C. Book shows his date of birth as January 5, 1972. He was an L.I.C. Agent as well as a fish monger. According to PW1 he used to get Rs.3,000/- per day from fish business. Ext.A11 is the M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -5- certificate issued by the Branch Manager, L.I.C., Thalassery Branch to the effect that the deceased used to get more than Rs.50,000/- per year as commission from the L.I.C. Policy. Exts.A9 and A10 certificates shows that he has passed Typewriting (Lower & Higher) and Computer course. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- and after deducting 1/3 rd for his personal expenses took Rs.3,000/- per month as his contribution to his family and took multiplier as 17 and awarded Rs.6,12,000/- for loss of dependency. Taking in to consideration the above aspect regarding the income of the deceased we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed as Rs.6,000/-. After deducting 1/3 rd for his personal expenses the balance amount of Rs.4,000/- per month can be taken as his monthly contribution to his family. As the deceased was aged 29 at the time of the accident the appropriate multiplier would be 18. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -6- entitled to a compensation of Rs.8,64,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads we find the same to be reasonable and are not disturbing the same. 9. Thus, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,52,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation 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 award. The impugned award is modified to the above extent. The appeal is disposed of as found above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. jvt M.A.C.A. No. 1540 of 2006 -7-