IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1336 of 2006()
1. BALAMANY, 48 YEARS, W/O.DAMODARAN @
... Petitioner
2. ARUN, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.LATE
3. ANU, AGED 15 YEARS,
4. ADDL. CLAIMANTS-4.
Vs
1. MURUKESAN, 31 YEARS, S/O.LAKSHMANAN,
... Respondent
2. K.SELVAMBALA, W/O.KRISHNASWAMI, 403,
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
4. THE PRESIDENT, INDIAN JUNIOR CHAMBER,
5. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
For Petitioner :SRI.PROMY KAPRAKKATT
For Respondent :SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :10/02/2010
O R D E R
A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.
------------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.1336 of 2006
------------------------------------------------------
Dated: FEBRUARY 10, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
In this appeal by the claimants under sec.173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, the wife, children and mother of deceased Damodaran
challenges the judgment and award of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Tirur in OP(MV) 625/2000 dated August 12, 2004 awarding a
compensation of Rs.4,64,500/- for the loss caused to them on account
of the death of deceased in a motor accident.
2. The facts in brief are these:- Deceased Damodaran @ Rajan
was aged 45 and was a ready made vendor earning about Rs.5000/-
per month. On April 22, 1996 at about 8 a.m. he sustained injuries in
a motor accident which has taken place near Vinayaka Engineering
College, Salem in Tamil Nadu. While he was taken to the Ramayya
Hospital at Mangalore in an ambulance bearing registration No.KL-
10A/8866, another vehicle bearing registration No.TN-27/B/9466
came at a high speed and dashed against the ambulance.
Damodaran sustained serious injuries and was taken to the
Government Mohankumaramangalam Medical College Hospital, Salem
from where he died. The appellants/claimants have claimed a
compensation of Rs.10 lakhs.
3. Respondents 1 to 3 in the OP and in this appeal, and the
MACA 1336/06 2
driver, the owner and the insurer of the vehicle bearing registration
No.TN-27/B/9466. Respondents 1 and 2 remained absent and were
set ex parte. The 3rd respondent filed a written statement admitting
the policy and contending that the accident occurred due to the
negligence on the part of the driver of the other vehicle. The 4th
respondent, owner of the ambulance van, also remained absent and
was set ex parte. The 5th respondent, insurer of the said van, filed a
written statement admitting the policy and contending that the
accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the
other vehicle.
4. The 1st claimant in the OP, wife of the deceased, was
examined as PW.1 before the Tribunal and Exts.A1 to A5 were marked
on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced by the
contesting respondents 3 and 5.
5. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the
accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st
respondent, the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No. TN-
27/B/9466 and granted a compensation of Rs.4,64,500/-.
6. In this appeal respondents 3 and 5, insurer of the offending
vehicle, entered appearance. The other respondents did not appear.
Notice to respondents 1 and 2 were dispensed with as the award was
passed against the 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle.
7. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the
MACA 1336/06 3
contesting 3rd respondent, Insurance Company of the offending
vehicle.
8. The accident was not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal
that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1st
respondent, driver of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. TN-
27/B/9466 was also not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only
question for consideration is whether the appellants/claimants are
entitled to any enhanced compensation.
9. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- for
the loss of dependency and Rs.14,500/- for loss of consortium,
totalling to Rs.4,64,500/-. According to PW.1 the deceased was aged
40 and was doing textile business and used to earn Rs.6000/- per
month. The Tribunal took the age of the deceased as 40 – 45 and his
income as Rs.3750/- per month. After deducting 1/3rd for his personal
expenses, his monthly contribution was assessed at Rs.2500/- per
month and adopted a multiplier of 15. To prove the income, the
appellants/claimants have produced Ext.A4 receipts for income tax
remitted. It was also testified by PW.1, the wife of the deceased, that
the deceased was waiting for Green Card for stay in America. Taking
into consideration all these aspects, we feel that the monthly income of
the deceased can be reasonably estimated at Rs.5000/- per month.
After deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses, his monthly
contribution to his family would be Rs.3350/- (5000 – 1650) which
MACA 1336/06 4
works out to Rs.40,200/- for one year. The multiplier of 15 adopted
by the Tribunal is not seriously disputed. Thus calculated, towards
loss of dependency, the compensation comes to Rs.6,03,000/-.
Therefore on this count the claimants are entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.
10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.14,500/- towards pain and
suffering, funeral expenses, loss of estate, love and affection etc. We
feel that on this count, the compensation of Rs.20,000/- would be
reasonable. Thus, on this count the claimants will be entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs.5,500/-.
11. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.1,55,500/-. They are entitled to interest at the
rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. For
the compensation already awarded also, they are entitled to interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.
The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending vehicle, shall deposit the
amount before the Tribunal within one month from this date.
The appeal is disposed of as found above.
A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE
P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
mt/-