High Court Kerala High Court

Ammed vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 23 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
Ammed vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 23 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1295 of 2008()


1. AMMED, 54 YEARS, S/O.SOOPPEY
                      ...  Petitioner
2. KADIYA, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.AMMED,
3. SAINABA, 30 YEARS, W/O.LATE MOIDU
4. KUNHABDULA 27 YEARS, S/O.AMMED
5. FIZAL 23 YEARS, S/O.AMMED,ALATHOTTATHIL
6. UMAIFA, 20 YEARS, W/O.IBRAJI,

                        Vs



1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :23/09/2010

 O R D E R
             A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                           M.A.C.A.No.1295 OF 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2010

                                JUDGMENT

Barkath Ali, J.

Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)497/2004 on the file

of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vadakara. They are the

parents, bother and sisters of deceased Afsal who died in a motor

accident. On November 27, 2003, while the deceased was travelling in

a jeep bearing Reg.No.KL/11 N 4457 from Ernakulam to Kakkuni and

when he reached near Potta, it suddenly skid towards right side of the

road and at that time a mini lorry came from the opposite side and

dashed against the jeep. The deceased sustained serious injuries and

he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in

the hospital. Alleging negligence against the driver of the jeep, the

claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act

claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.

2. First respondent, the owner of the offending jeep remained

absent before the Tribunal. The second respondent, the insurer of the

offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy of the

MACA.No.1295/2008 2

jeep, but denied the liability.

3. This O.P. was tried along with other O.P.s filed by the other

injured persons and the legal heirs of other deceased persons and a

common award was passed. Exts.A1 to A33 were marked on the side of

the claimants before the Tribunal. Exts.B1 and B2 were marked on the

side of the contesting second respondent. On an appreciation of

evidence the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,80,000/-

with interest at the rate of 6% 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 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 jeep is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only

question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are

entitled to any enhanced compensation.

6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,80,000/-

The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:

MACA.No.1295/2008 3

            Loss of dependency            - Rs.1,52,000/-
            Funeral expenses              - Rs. 2,000/-
            Transportation                - Rs. 1,000/-
            Loss of love and affection    - Rs. 25,000/-

7. The Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the

compensation awarded for the loss of dependency and for pain and

suffering endured by the deceased .

8. The deceased was aged 22 at the time of accident. He was

a painting contractor earning Rs. 10,000/- per month, according to the

claimants. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as

Rs.2000/- and a multiplier of 11. For loss of dependency, the Tribunal

awarded Rs. 1,28,000/- for the first eight years after deducting 1/3 for

his personal expenses. As the deceased would have got married

thereafter half of income was deducted for his personal expenses and

the Tribunal awarded Rs.24,000/- for the remaining three years. As

the deceased was a painting contractor, we feel that his monthly income

can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,000/-. After deducting 1/3 for his

personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 2,000/- can be taken as

his monthly contribution to his family. A multiplier of 11 can be

adopted in this case. Thus calculated, for the loss of dependency the

claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.2,64,000/- (2,000 x 12 x

MACA.No.1295/2008 4

11). Thus on this count the claimant is entitled to an additional

compensation of Rs.1,12,000/-

9. No amount was awarded for the pain and suffering endured by

the deceased. Therefore, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 10,000/-

would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation

awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and

therefore we are not disturbing the same.

10. Thus the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation

of Rs.1,22,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum

from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already

awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. The 2nd

respondent/respondent herein 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

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

sv.

MACA.No.1295/2008 5

MACA.No.1295/2008 6