IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1525 of 2007()
1. ROSILY WILSON, W/O. WILSON,
... Petitioner
2. ROSEMY WILSON A., D/O. WILSON,
3. RESMY WILSON A (MINOR), AGED 17 YEARS,
Vs
1. M/S. SHIV KESHAV TRANSPORT NO.47,
... Respondent
2. GANGAPPA, S/O. CHIKKARAMAIAH,
3. MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BABY
For Respondent :SRI.LAL GEORGE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :13/10/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.1525 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 13th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellants are claimants 2 to 4 in OP(MV)74/2001 on the file of
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. They are the
mother and sisters of deceased Rosewill Wilson who died in a motor
accident. The first claimant, the father of deceased, died during the
pendency of the O.P. On May 19, 2005, while the deceased was pillion
riding on the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-8/M 7885 along
Thrissur-Ikkanda Warrier road and reached at Ikkanda Warrier road
junction, he was knocked down by a goods carriage bearing
Reg.No.KA-04/A 2389 driven by the second respondent. The deceased
sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained
while undergoing treatment in the hospital after two days. Alleging
negligence against the driver of the goods carriage, the second
respondent, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.
2. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the
MACA.No.1525/2007 2
offending goods carriage remained absent before the Tribunal. The
third respondent, the insurer of the offending goods carriage filed a
written statement admitting the policy of the goods carriage, but
denied the liability.
3. This O.P. was tried along with the other O.P. filed by the
rider of the motor cycle and a common award was passed. PW1 was
examined and Exts.A1 to A26 were marked on the side of the
claimants before the Tribunal. On an appreciation of evidence the
Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the
second respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,53,370/-
with cost and interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of
petition till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the
counsel for the Insurance Company.
5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal
that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the
driver of the goods carriage is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore
the only question which arises for consideration is whether the
claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation.
MACA.No.1525/2007 3
6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,53,370/-
The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:
Extra nourishment - Rs. 200/-
Transport expenses - Rs. 1,000/-
Funeral expenses - Rs. 3,500/-
Medical expenses - Rs. 6,670/-
Loss of estate - Rs. 2,500/-
Pain and suffering - Rs. 7,500/-
Loss of love and affection - Rs. 12,000/-
Loss of dependency - Rs. 1,20,000/-
7. The Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the
compensation for the loss of dependency and on other heads.
8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as
Rs.1,250/- which comes to Rs. 15,000/- per annum and after deducting
1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 10,000/- was
taken was his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a
multiplier of 12 and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/- for the
loss of dependency. The deceased was aged 20 at the time of the
accident and was not employed. Therefore, his monthly income was
fixed at Rs. 1250/- by the Tribunal. But he was a B.Com. student at the
time of his death. He was the only son of first appellant, the mother.
Taking into consideration that aspect, we feel that his monthly income
can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,500/- which comes to Rs. 30,000/- per
MACA.No.1525/2007 4
annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance
amount of Rs. 20,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his
family. The proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case is 14.
Thus calculated, for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled
to a compensation of Rs.2,80,000/- ( 20,000 x 14). Thus on this count,
the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of
Rs.1,60,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other
heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not
disturbing the same.
9. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/-. They are entitled to interest
@ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and
proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the
offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The
award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.
The Appeal is disposed of as found above.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE
sv P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
MACA.No.1525/2007 5
sv.
MACA.No.1525/2007 6