IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 500 of 2004 C ----------------------------------------- OPMV.214/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------- 1. MUTHEDATH KAIRUNNISSA, AGED 41 YEARS, W/O. LATE PARTHIKUNNAN ABDU, PARUTHIKUNNAN HOUSE, NALLANTHANI P.O., NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. SHAILAJA, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O. LATE PARTHIKUNNAN ABDU, -DO- -DO-. 3. SHAJITHA, AGED 23 YEARS, -DO- -DO-. 4. JASEENA P.K., AGED 21 YEARS, -DO- -DO-. 5. SEMEERA P.K., AGED 19 YEARS, -DO- -DO-. 6. MOHAMMED FAISAL P.K., AGED 17, -DO- -DO- THE 6TH APPELLANT IS A MINOR AND IS REPRESENTED BY 1ST APPELLANT MOTHER. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------------- 1. N.K.ALAVIKUTTY, S/O. N.K.UNNIALI, NECHIKUNDIL HOUSE, P.O. MUKKATTA, RIDER. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., MANJERI. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN FOR R2 SRI.RAJIT FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO. 500 OF 2004 C --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th July, 2009 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. This is a case where the insurance is admitted. The matter is of the year 2004. The first respondent is not yet served. We dispense with notice to the first respondent. 2. The appellants are the widow and five children of a person who died in a motor accident. We are taking the Appeal itself for hearing on consent, since there is a valid insurance coverage. We heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent Insurance Company also. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants would point out that the tribunal has erred in awarding only Rs.1,87,200/= towards dependency. The tribunal has, in arriving at Rs.1,87,200/=, applied a multiplier of 13 after taking the income at Rs.1,800/=per month and reduced 1/3rd towards personal MACA.NO.500 OF 2004 C 2 expenses. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company would support the award. 4. We notice that going by the Judgment of the Apex Court, a multiplier of 14 can be taken for age group 41 to 45. The deceased was 45 years of age. Therefore, going by the Judgment, we can take the multiplier as 14. Further, we notice that there are six dependents. Therefore, going by the said Judgment of the Apex Court, we need only reduce 1/4th and not 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, the appellants would be entitled to Rs.2,26,800/= which we round off to Rs.2,27,000/=. But the appellants are not entitled to compensation towards pain and suffering. Therefore, the appellants would be entitled to realise a sum of Rs.2,27,000/=.We award the appellants Rs.30,000/= more under the head “dependency”. Learned counsel for the appellants would point out that only 6 per cent interest was awarded. We award 7.5 per cent interest on the amount already awarded and the amount we have allowed in this Appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellants are allowed to MACA.NO.500 OF 2004 C 3 realise Rs.30,000/= more with interest at 7. 5 per cent from the date of the petition till the date of realisation from the second respondent. We also award interest at 7.5 per cent instead of 6 per cent on the amount already awarded by the tribunal. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge