IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 1341 of 2001()
1. C.V. ANTHONY
... Petitioner
Vs
1. P.K. PAULY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.N.MANOJ
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :14/12/2007
O R D E R
J.B. Koshy & K.Hema, JJ.
————————————–
M.F.A.No. 1341 of 2001
—————————————
Dated this the 14th day of December, 2007
Judgment
Koshy,J.
A pedestrian was knocked down by a car bearing
registration No.KL-9A 9274 on 15.12.1998 at 1.15 a.m. The above
car was driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent
manner. The pedestrian who sustained fatal injuries succumbed to
the injuries before reaching the hospital. His father, mother, widow
and two minor daughters filed application for compensation claiming
an amount of Rs.Four lakhs, but, the tribunal awarded only
Rs.2,20,000/-. The only dispute in this appeal is regarding the
quantum of compensation.
2. It has come out in evidence that the appellant was
conducting a tyre retreading business of his own. Apart from the
oral evidence, Exts.A7 to A11 prove the same. Ext.A11 counterfoil
of the receipt book was produced to show the income for the year
1998. According to the claimants, the deceased was earning
Rs.3,000/- per month from his business. He had employed two
persons also in the establishment. It is found by the tribunal also
M.F.A.No.1341/2001 2
that he was running a tyre retreading workshop at Potta on the side
of National Highway By-pass. PW1, father of the deceased deposed
that he was getting between Rs.3,000/- and Rs.4,000/- per month
and the entire family was depending upon the income earned from
him. There was no counter evidence. When the accident occurred
in 1998, he was running his own establishment of tyre retreading
and vulcanizing, employing two other employees also. He was
maintaining a family. Considering these facts and Ext.A11 receipts
etc. we are of the opinion that the tribunal should have fixed
Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income even without taking future
prospects and other factors. After deducting one-third, Rs.2,000/-
can be taken as the monthly loss of dependency. The deceased was
aged 35. Taking guidance from the second schedule, the tribunal
has fixed 16 as the multiplier. Even though it was argued that in
view of the increased life expectancy and decrease in interest rate
and considering the fact that the deceased left behind his young
wife and two minor daughters, a higher multiplier should be fixed,
we are of the opinion that no enhancement in the multiplier is
needed. Therefore, compensation payable will be Rs.2,000 x 12 x
16 = Rs.3,84,000/-. The tribunal has awarded Rs.1,92,000/- under
this head. Hence, claimants are entitled to an additional
M.F.A.No.1341/2001 3
compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- over and above the amount decreed
by the tribunal. Even though it was argued that compensation
awarded under other heads are very low, we are of the view that no
enhancement is needed under other heads. The above amount of
Rs.1,92,000/- should be deposited by the third respondent insurance
company with 7.5 % interest from the date of application till its
deposit. On deposit of the amount, appellants 1 and 2 (father and
mother), are allowed to withdraw Rs.10,000/- each and third
appellant widow is allowed to withdraw Rs.50,000/-. Balance
amount with the entire interest accrued thereon on the date of
deposit shall be deposited in the names of fourth and fifth
appellants (children) in a nationalised bank enabling them to
withdraw the same in equal proportion when they become the age
of 21 or at the time of their marriage whichever is earlier.
Appeal allowed partly.
J.B.Koshy
Judge
K. Hema
Judge
vaa
M.F.A.No.1341/2001 4
J.B. KOSHY AND
K.HEMA,JJ.
————————————-
M.F.A. No. 1341 of 2001
————————————-
Judgment
Dated:14th December, 2007