IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 451 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.611/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPLICANTS ------------------------ 1. MATHEW,M.GEORGE,T.C.3/713, MUNJANATTU,C.K.LANE, T.K.DIVAKARAN ROAD,MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ELIZABATH KURIAN,RESIDING AT DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL SRI.T.A.PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SUBHA RAJ,S/O.KONDA SWAMY, T.C.23/817,VALIYASSALA, THYCAUD VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KESAVAN,S/O.DEVARAJAN,VADAKKE THERUVU, MEENALLOOR GRAMOM,VIRUTHU NAGAR TALUK, TAMIL NADU. 3. THE MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY FOR R3 SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.451 of 2003 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of December, 2008. JUDGMENT Thomas P.Joseph, J. Appellants claimed compensation for the death of their son aged 15 years at the relevant time. Accident occurred on 24.1.1998. The lorry driven by the second respondent, as found by the Tribunal in a rash and negligent manner hit the cycle which deceased was riding. Deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to it. Appellants claimed Rs.5 lakhs as compensation. Tribunal awarded Rs.1,63,000/-. Appellants are aggrieved and hence, this appeal. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Point for consideration is whether appellants are entitled to get enhanced compensation. MACA No.451/2003 2 4. The Point. First respondent, father of the deceased, manager of a bank was aged 44 years and the second appellant, mother of the deceased, cashier in a bank was aged 43 years at the relevant time. Deceased was studying in Layola School, Thiruvananthapuram as proved by Ext.A3 series. According to the appellants, deceased was brilliant in his studies and other extra-curricular activities. Tribunal fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.1,800/- per month. Tribunal however, observed that from the monthly income of Rs.1,800/- which the deceased would be earning on attaining 20 years, he would spend around Rs.600/- for personal expenses and hence, the balance in his hand to be contributed to the family is Rs.1,200/- per month. Tribunal also referred to what would be the age of the appellants on the deceased attaining the age of 20, the possibility of the deceased getting married at the age of 28 and the possible contribution to the appellants thereafter. '8' was taken as the multiplier and a total sum of Rs.1,33,000/- was awarded for loss of dependency and contribution. Learned counsel for appellants contended that the multiplier adopted is low and that once multiplier is taken, it was not necessary to assess compensation for dependency in the way above stated and done by the Tribunal. MACA No.451/2003 3 5. Since the deceased was aged 15 years, multiplier to be taken as per the Second Schedule is '15'. Assuming that the deceased was not an earning member at the time of death and hence, it is the age of the appellants (parents of the deceased) to be looked into for fixing the multiplier, then also '15' should be taken as the multiplier since first appellant was aged 44 years and second appellant was aged 43 years at the time of accident. Therefore, Tribunal was not correct in limiting the multiplier to '8'. We therefore, fix '15' as the multiplier. 6. So far as the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is concerned, though it is contended by the learned counsel that it is on the lower side, we are not inclined to accept that contention. Vagaries and imponderables of life has also to be taken into account. Deceased was aged only 15 years at the time of death. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the notional income fixed by the Tribunal. 7. Since notional monthly income is fixed and a suitable multiplier has been taken for assessment of compensation payable for loss of dependency and contribution, it is not necessary to make any further deduction in the income assuming what would be the age of appellants on the deceased MACA No.451/2003 4 attaining the age of 20, the possibility of the deceased getting married at the age of 28 and the possible contribution to the appellants thereafter. These factors are taken care of by the multiplier that is provided by the Second Schedule. 8. Less one third of the notional monthly income which the deceased would be spending for personal purposes, the contribution to the appellants per month is Rs.1,200/-. Taking '15' as the multiplier as above stated, compensation payable for loss of dependency and contribution is Rs.2,16,000/- (Rs.1,200x12x15) as against Rs.1,33,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the additional compensation payable on that count is Rs.83,000/-. 9. It is contended by the learned counsel that compensation awarded on other counts are low. It is seen that Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- for loss of love and affection and Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses and transportation charges. We are satisfied that the compensation awarded on those counts are just and fair and required no interference. Thus, the additional compensation payable to the appellants is Rs.83,000/-. They will also get interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization. MACA No.451/2003 5 Resultantly, this appeal is allowed in part. Over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, appellants are allowed to realise a further sum of Rs.83,000/- (Rupees Eightythree thousand only) with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of application till realization from respondents 1 to 3, jointly and severally. Third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit the said amount in the Tribunal. On such deposit , appellants will share the amount equally and are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks