IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 MFA.No. 1568 of 2001(D) ----------------------- APPELLANT/PETITIONERS IN O.P.(MV): ----------------------------------------------- 1. ANTONY, S/o. POULO, AGED 27 YEARS, PAREKATTIL HOUSE, AREECKAL JUNCTION, KARUKUTTY. 2. THRESSIAKUTTY, W/o. ANTONY, DO. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE THETTAYIL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN O.P.(MV): -------------------------------------------------- 1. P.A.JOHN, S/o. ANTHAPPAN, PULLADAN HOUSE, CHEERACHIKULAM, OLLUR, THRISSUR. 2. GOVINDA RAJ, S/o. RAMAKRISHNAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM DESOM. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., THRICHUR. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.M.NAJEEB KHAN THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------- M.F.A.NO.1568 OF 2001 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. This appeal is filed by the unfortunate parents who lost their son in a motor accident at the age of 29. Tribunal found that accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the 3rd respondent Insurance company. Against a claim of Rs.7,23,000/- only an amount of Rs.63,800/- was awarded by the tribunal. Only quantum of compensation is disputed in this appeal. 2. Deceased was 29 years old at the time of accident. According to the claimants, he was a contractor. He produced Ext.A5 to A11 documents to show his income. Ext.A15 copy of R.C. Book shows that he was the owner of a tipper lorry. Ext.A16 is the sale deed which shows that he was able to purchase the property by spending more on his savings. MFA.1568/2001 2 Ext.A11 shows that he was the owner of another vehicle. Ext.A10 is the intimation from the Income Tax Act. Ext.A5 shows that he had contract with the Kerala State Electricity Board. According to the claimants, his income was Rs.6,000/-. Tribunal has taken only Rs.1,200/-. It cannot be denied that he was a contractor having sufficient work. He has got two vehicles of his own and Ext.A8 partnership deed shows that he was engaged in a business. Totality of the evidence shows that he was having contract wok and it cannot be denied. Considering the fact that no clear data regarding income from the assets are not produced even though Rs.6,000/- as monthly income cannot be accepted, tribunal ought have fixed Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income. Considering the age of the parents, tribunal has fixed 5 as the multiplier. We see no ground to change the above. He was unmarried at the time of accident. So, after deducting 1/3 rd for personal expenses, compensation payable for loss of dependency will be Rs.2,000 x 12 x 5 = Rs.1,20,000/-. Tribunal has awarded only Rs.48,000/-. Hence, he is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.72,000/-. The above amount should be deposited by the 3rd MFA.1568/2001 3 respondent Insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of application till its deposit over and above the decreed amount by the tribunal. On deposit of the above amount, appellants are allowed to withdraw the same in equal proportion. With the above observations this appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO.1568 OF 2001 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 5th February, 2008