IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 MACA.No. 807 of 2004 B ---------------------- OPMV.663/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS. -------------------------------------------- 1. RAMLA BEEVI, W/O.LATE MUHAMMED IBRAHIM, KANDATHIL PUTHEN VEETTIL, PARATHODU P.O. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. BATHUSHA MUHAMMED IBRAHIM, KANDATHIL PUTHEN VEETTIL, PARATHODU P.O. (MINOR) KANJIRAPPALLY, REP. BY NEXT FRIEND RAMLA BEEVI. BY ADV. SMT.MINI ELIZABETH GEORGE SMT.BETTY K.ALUKKA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. ------------------------------------------------- 1. O.C.YESUDASAN, ONAKKAYATHU HOUSE, CHELIKUZHY, MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., THODUPUZHA BRANCH. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. NO. 807 OF 2004 B ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th August, 2009 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Delay is condoned. Since insurance is admitted, we are disposing of the Appeal on consent. 2. Appellants are the petitioners in O.P.(MV).No.663/95 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala. Late husband of the first appellant and father of the second appellant died as a result of the injuries suffered in a motor accident which took place on 29.7.1991. The deceased had suffered injuries to the brain. He was working as a Driver and Carpenter, according to the appellants, in Oman and earning Rs.14,000/= per month. He was aged 35 years. The tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.3,88,500/=. The Appeal is directed against the quantum. MACA.NO.807/04 2 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent, Insurance Company. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the tribunal has erred in not taking Rs.14,000/= as the monthly income of the deceased which is certified under Ext.A10 Salary Certificate. Ext.A10 is dated 02.4.1996. The accident took place in 1991. The tribunal has taken Rs.2,000/= as the monthly income. The tribunal found that it is not noted in Ext.A10 as to who has issued the Certificate or in what capacity it was issued. It was the admission of PW1 that the Visa period was only for two years and there was no security that the job will continue after the period of two years, which was also considered in fixing the income at Rs.2,000/= per month. By taking 16 as the multiplier, Rs.2,56,000/= was arrived at as the dependency compensation. Of the same, Rs.1 Lakh each was directed to be paid to the parents of the deceased. MACA.NO.807/04 3 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that this is a case where there was evidence in the form of Annexure A10 Certificate that the deceased was in receipt of Rs.14,000/= as income per month. It is pointed out that the deceased was in Oman for a number of years. Learned counsel would, no doubt, wound admit that the first appellant has re-married after a period of nine years. The second appellant was a minor child and she points out that educational expenses also are there. The second appellant was only 17 days of age when the accident took place. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company supported the Award. 5. We cannot accept the case of the appellants that Ext.A10 must be accepted in toto. The reasons which have been given by the tribunal, cannot be brushed aside as wholly incorrect. But, at the same time, having regard to the date of the accident, and having regard to all circumstances of the case, we feel that the income can be fixed as Rs.3,000/= per month. On the said basis and adopting the said multiplier, the appellants MACA.NO.807/04 4 would be entitled to Rs.3,84,000/= in place of Rs.2,56,000/= awarded by the tribunal, that is to say, Rs.1,28,000/= more. We feel that this amount can be awarded in favour of the appellants. Accordingly, the Appeal is partly allowed and the appellants are allowed to realise a sum of Rs.1,28,000/= more with 7.5 per cent interest from the date of the petition till the date of realisation from the second respondent. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge