IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1930 MACA.No. 494 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.1456/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. P.RUGMINI, W/O.LATE RAVEENDRANATH K., MALAPPURAM AMSOM, DESOM, D.P.O.ROAD, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. REKHA, D/O.LATE RAVEENDRANATH K., MALAPPURAM AMSOM, DESOM, D.P.O.ROAD, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. RESHMI, D/O.LATE RAVEENDRANATH K., MALAPPURAM AMSOM, DESOM, D.P.O.ROAD, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. KUNHILAKSHMI AMMA, W/O.BALAKRISHNA MENON, MALAPPURAM AMSOM, DESOM, D.P.O.ROAD, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. K.V.HARI, S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, AROCHANA HOUSE NARUKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.NARUKARA, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. by // THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO.494 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before us. They are the wife, two major children and mother of the deceased. The wife is aged 48 years, the female children are aged 25 years and 23 years and the mother is aged 77 years. They claimed an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the husband of the first appellant, father of appellants 2 and 3 and son of the fourth appellant. The deceased was employed as Cashier-cum-Clerk of Indian Bank, Calicut. He was drawing a monthly income of Rs.14,323.45 at the time of his death. He had suffered injuries and succumbed to the same four days after the accident. Before the Tribunal, Exts.A1 to A4 were marked. No other evidence was adduced. 2. The Tribunal, on an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, came to the conclusion that the appellants are entitled to an amount M..A.C.A. NO.494/2009 2 of Rs.9,71,200/- as compensation as per the details shown in paragraph 7 of the award: i. Transport to the hospital :Rs. 1,000/- ii. Funeral expenses :Rs. 2,000/- iii. Pain and suffering :Rs. 9,000/- iv. Loss to estate :Rs. 2,500/- v. Loss of consortium :Rs. 5,000/- vi. Loss of love and affection :Rs. 5,000/- vii. Loss of dependency Upto 58 years(14323x12x2x8/3) :Rs.9,16,672/- viii After 58 years(15000x2x3/3) :Rs. 30,000/- ------------------ Total :Rs.9,71,172/- Rounded to :Rs.9,71,200/- ------------------ 3. The appellants claim to be aggrieved by the impugned award. What is the grievance? Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amount awarded under the heads pain and suffering, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection are not adequate. It is strenuously contended that the Tribunal erred in reckoning the multiplier as 8 alone and in computing the compensation with the multiplicand at Rs.14,323 for eight years only. For the remaining three years, it is argued M..A.C.A. NO.494/2009 3 that only a lower amount of Rs.15,000/- has been reckoned as the multiplicand. This is unjust, contends counsel. 4. The deceased was aged 51 years at the time of his death. The multiplier applicable, going by the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, is 11. The Tribunal found that the deceased would have continued in the same employment for a period of eight years and would have retired on superannuation at the end of eight years. Therefore, the Tribunal adopted his present salary of Rs.14,323/- as the multiplicand for a period of eight years and thereafter taking into account the post retirement prospects in employment, the Tribunal awarded compensation for the remaining three years reckoning the multiplicand at Rs.15,000/-. It is contended that the Tribunal ought to have quantified the compensation for the entire period of 11 years taking Rs.14,323/- as the multiplicand and, at any rate the multiplicand reckoned at Rs.15,000/- for the last three years is not justified. We are unable to agree. We note that the entire present salary has been reckoned as multiplicand for the period during which the deceased would have continued in employment. The approach made by the Tribunal is fair, reasonable and just. We are persuaded to agree that no higher amount is liable to be awarded under the head loss of dependency. Under the other heads shown above also, the appellants have M..A.C.A. NO.494/2009 4 been reasonably compensated and we are not persuaded to agree that any higher amount is liable to be paid under those heads. 5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (R. BASANT) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ M..A.C.A. NO.494/2009 5 R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. M.A.C.A. NO.494/2009 JUDGMENT 25th February, 2009 M..A.C.A. NO.494/2009 6