IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 226 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.565/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., RAVIPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. M.P.SANTHA, W/O.LATE SACHIDANANDAN @ MADHU, MANGALAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.PARUTHOOR, PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SAJEEV, S/O.LATE SACHIDANANDAN @ MADHU, MANGALAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.PARUTHOOR, PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. SAJEESH, S/O.LATE SACHIDANANDAN @ MADHU, MANGALAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.PARUTHOOR, PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. (RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR GUARDIAN-MOTHER, THE FIRST RESPONDENT). 4. P.V.KALIKKUTTI, STEP MOTHER OF LATE SACHIDANANDAN @ MADHU, MANGALAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.PARUTHOOR, PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. M.P.THAMI, F/O.LATE SACHIDANANDAN @ MADHU, MANGALAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.PARUTHOOR, PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH - R1 TO R5 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008 ALONG WITH MACA.NO.2036 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== M.A.C.A.Nos.226 & 2036 of 2007 ===================== Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy,J. Husband, wife and two children along with the parents of a motor accident victim allege negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the third respondent - Insurance Company. They approached the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.25,01,000/-. The Tribunal allowed only Rs.10,69,652/- towards compensation with interest and costs. The claimants filed M.A.C.A.No.2036 of 2007 contending that the quantum of compensation awarded was inadequate whereas the third respondent - Insurance Company filed M.A.C.A.No.226 of 2007 wherein it was contended that the compensation awarded was excessive. 2. The deceased was an electrical contractor. According to the claimants, his monthly income was Rs.30,000/-. The Tribunal considered the documents and found that his average monthly MACA Nos.226 & 2036/07 -: 2 :- income was Rs.15,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, Rs.10,000/- was fixed as his monthly income. The assessment of monthly income was based on evidence. Ext.A11 is the electrical contractor's licence. Exts.A12 and A13 are the permanent work register. The details of the work are maintained in the register. The deceased was 39 years old. The Tribunal has taken 8 as the multiplier. It is the contention of the petitioner that as per the Second Schedule, the multiplier is 16, but only 8 is taken. But the Apex Court has held that the multiplier as per the Second Schedule has to be taken only for guidance and if there is a high multiplicand a lower multiplier can be used (see United Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Patricia Jean Mahajan and others - JT 2002 (5) SC 74). We also note that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.30,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.30,000/- for loss of estate apart from the medical expenses and Rs.4000/- was awarded for funeral expenses. At the time of the application, his wife was aged 36 and children were aged 16 and 14. The accident occurred on 30.4.2004. Considering the total amount awarded, age of the claimants and the income of the deceased and totality of the circumstances, we are of the MACA Nos.226 & 2036/07 -: 3 :- opinion that just and reasonable compensation was awarded and no interference is required. Hence, both the appeals are dismissed. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 7/6