IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 418 of 2006()
1. T.SANTHAMMA, AGED 43,
... Petitioner
2. SOUMYA S.(MINOR),
3. ANAND S. NAIR(MINOR),
Vs
1. V.SANIL KUMAR, S/O.VELAPPAN NAIR,
... Respondent
2. THE MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
For Respondent :SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :21/11/2008
O R D E R
J.B. KOSHY & THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
M.A.C.A. No.418 of 2006
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008
J U D G M E N T
———————-
Koshy, J.
Husband of the first appellant died in a motor accident.
Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the
driver of the vehicle insured with the second respondent insurance
company. However, against a claim of Rs.14,00,000/-, only a sum of
Rs.4,94,560/- was granted. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of
compensation.
2. According to the appellants-claimants, deceased was aged
48 at the time of the accident. But since the postmortem report
shows that deceased was aged 50, Tribunal took 50 as the age of the
deceased which is supported by the extract of the SSLC Book. Tribunal
fixed 11 as the multiplier taking guidelines from the Second Schedule
of the Motor Vehicles Act. Deceased was a mechanic in the KSRTC.
Since the employee of KSRTC has to retire at the age of 55, Tribunal
calculated the loss of dependency on two methods; one, for five years
and the other, for six years. We are of the opinion that such a
calculation is not necessary because being employed in a public
sector undertaking, the deceased was entitled to get periodical wage
M.A.C.A. No.418 of 2006
-: 2 :-
revision apart from yearly increment and time bound promotions. If
the deceased continued in the employment, his salary would have
been doubled at the time of his retirement. The deceased would have
got retirement benefits on the basis of the last drawn salary also. But
the Tribunal has taken into account only his salary at the time of the
accident and no amount was taken for future prospects. Being a
mechanic the deceased would have earned money from other
employments after his retirement. Therefore a higher monthly
income should have been fixed by the Tribunal. Exhibit A6 is the
salary certificate which shows that the deceased was getting a
monthly salary of Rs.8,849/-. The Certificate also shows that out of
Rs.8,849/-, Rs.7,020/- is basic the pay, Rs.1,544 is DA, Rs.270 is HRA
and Rs.15/- is washing allowance. Tribunal has taken Rs.8,564/- as
the monthly income. Taking into account the fact that the deceased
will retire at the age of 55 years and the further fact that his
retirement benefits will be more considering his last drawn salary and
since he was an experienced mechanic he would have earned money
after retirement, for the purpose of calculation of compensation we fix
Rs.7,500/- as the monthly income. After deducting 1/3rd towards
personal expenses, Rs.5,000/- can be taken as the monthly
contribution. Therefore compensation payable will be Rs.6,60,000/-.
M.A.C.A. No.418 of 2006
-: 3 :-
From that amount, Rs.4,38,560/- has to be deducted being the
amount awarded by the Tribunal and the balance will be Rs.2,21,440/-.
There is a calculation mistake of Rs.15,000/- committed by the
Tribunal while adding the total amount. That also has to be
deducted. So the additional compensation payable to the appellants
will be Rs.2,06,440/-, over and above the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal. The second respondent being the insurer of the
offending vehicle is directed to deposit the said amount with interest
at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till
realisation. On such deposit, the first appellant is permitted to
withdraw 1/3rd. The balance amount shall be deposited in Fixed
Deposit in a Nationalised Bank in the name of appellants 2 and 3
enabling them to withdraw the same at the time of their marriage or
when they attain 21 years, whichever is earlier.
Appeal is allowed in part.
J.B. KOSHY, JUDGE.
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.
vsv