IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 964 of 2005() ---------------------- OPMV.1775/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------ 1. CELEENA, W/O. JOSE @ JOSEPH, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, ELINJIPRA P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. JOHNY, S/O. LATE JOSE @ JOSEPH, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, ELINJIPRA P.O. 3. JOICY, D/O. LATE JOSE @ JOSEPH, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, ELINJIPRA P.O. 4. JOSHY, S/O. LATE JOSE @ JOSEPH, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, ELINJIPRA P.O. 5. JOBINI, D/O. LATE JOSE @ JOSEPH, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, ELINJIPRA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. R. ARUCHAMY, S/O. RANGASWAMY GOUNDER XI/377, PAMPAN PALAM, PALAKKAD. 2. SENTHILKUMAR, S/O. ARUCHAMY, PALANI ANDAVAR KOVIL STREET, K.K. CHAWADI, COIMBATORE. 3. MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NEHRU STREET, TIRUPUR-1. ADV. SMT.P.A.REZIYA FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.964 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 28th day of August, 2008. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appellants are wife and children of a 58 year old man who died in the accident. Main grievance of the appellants is with regard to the multiplier adopted. While appellants claim that the age of the deceased was only 48 years, counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that under the Election Identification Card, age of the deceased was 58 years and in the Post Mortem report age was stated to be around 60 years. The age shown in the Post Mortem report should be probably an approximate age. When there is documentary evidence, we feel it is safe to rely on the document namey, the Election Identification Card. Going by the age in the said Card, multiplier applied i.e. 5 is incorrect because the Second Schedule provides for 8 as the multiplier. So far as the estimation of income is concerned, we do not find any justification to reduce the claim of monthly income from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.2,000/-. We, therefore, feel that income of the deceased can be taken at Rs.3,000/- per month and after deducting one third towards personal expenses, the net dependency has to be fixed based on a net income of 2 Rs.24,000/- per annum. Thus applying the multiplier 8, appellants will be entitled to Rs.1,92,000/- towards compensation for loss of dependency. Consequently, compensation for loss of dependency stands increased from Rs.80,000/- to Rs.1,92,000/-. No other modification is called for in the award. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation with interest at 7.5% p.a. from date of application till date of deposit. The appeal stands allowed to the above extent. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge V.K.MOHANAN Judge pms