High Court Kerala High Court

Elsy vs Mercy Baby on 11 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Elsy vs Mercy Baby on 11 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 971 of 2004()


1. ELSY, W/O.CHATHELY PAULOSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. BINDU C.P., D/O.LATE CHATHELY PAULOSE,
3. BEENA C.P., D/O.LATE CHATHELY PAULOSE,

                        Vs



1. MERCY BABY, W/O.BABY, NEYYAN HOUSE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. RAVI P.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN,

3. THE MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.BABY

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.KIRAN

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

 Dated :11/06/2010

 O R D E R
             A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         M.A.C.A.No.971 OF 2004
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010

                                 JUDGMENT

Barkath Ali, J.

In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the

claimants in O.P.(MV)No.324/1998 of Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda challenges the judgment and award of the

Tribunal dated November 28, 2003 awarding a compensation of

Rs. 1,98,900/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of

deceased Baiju in a motor accident.

2. The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

The deceased Baiju was aged 24 at the time of accident and used

to earn Rs. 3,000/- per month by conducting a travel agency by name

M/s. Sangeetha Travels at Vellikulangara. Claimants are the mother

and sisters of the deceased. On November 6, 1997 at about 3.15 p.m,

the deceased was riding his scooter bearing Reg.No. KL-8/J 595 along

National Highway 47. When he reached at Mamangalam near

Palarivattom, a lorry bearing Reg.No.KCF 365 driven by second

respondent came at a high speed and dashed against the scooter of the

MACA.No.971/2004 2

deceased. Deceased sustained serious injuries and he died on the spot.

According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and

negligent driving of the offending lorry by second respondent. First

respondent as the owner, second respondent as the driver and third

respondent as the insurer of the offending lorry are jointly and

severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the

dependents and legal heirs of the deceased. The claimants claimed a

compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs.

3. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending

lorry remained absent and were set ex-parte by the Tribunal. The third

respondent the insurer of the offending lorry filed a written statement

admitting the policy and further contended that the accident occurred

due to the negligence on the part of the deceased.

4. The claimant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A12

were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No

evidence was adduced by the contesting third respondent. The

Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident

occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry by

second respondent and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,67,700/- with

MACA.No.971/2004 3

interest @ 9% 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.

5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimants and the

counsel for the Insurance Company.

6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal

that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the

second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only

question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are

entitled to any enhanced compensation.

7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of

Rs.1,67,700/- ( mistakenly noted as Rs. 1,98,900/-). The break up of

the compensation awarded is as under :

      Loss of dependency           - Rs. 1,63,200/-
      Funeral expenses             - Rs.   2,000/-
      Pain and suffering           - Rs.   2,500/-

8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of

compensation for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal took the

monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 1,200/- and after deducting 1/3

towards his personal expenses, his contribution to the family was taken

MACA.No.971/2004 4

as Rs. 800/- and adopted a multiplier of 17 as the deceased was aged 25

at the time of the accident and awarded Rs. 1,63,200/- for the loss of

dependency.Counsel for the claimants submitted that as the deceased

was conducting a travel agency and earning more than Rs. 3,000/- per

month, the monthly income of the deceased taken by the Tribunal is

very low.

9. There is force in the above submission. Ext.A9 is the

certificate issued by the President of Mattathur Grama Panchayath

certifying that the deceased Baiju was running Sangeetha Travels in

Mattathur panchayath. Ext.A10 is the certificate of the Manager, Blue

Sky Travels certifying that the deceased was conducting a travel

agency by name M/s. Sangeetha Travels. Ext.A11 series are certain

receipts issued to the deceased by Blue Sky Travels. Taking into

consideration all these aspects, we feel that the monthly income of the

deceased can be reasonably estimated at Rs. 2,500/- which works out to

Rs. 30,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses,

the balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- per annum can be taken as his

contribution to the family. As the deceased was aged 25 at the time of

the accident, the proper multiplier that can be adopted in this case as

MACA.No.971/2004 5

per the Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act is 18. Thus calculated

for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation

of Rs. 3,60,000/- ( 20,000 x 18). Thus on this count, the claimants are

entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,96,800/-. As regards

the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be

reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.

10. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an

additional compensation of Rs. 1,96,800/-. The award of the Tribunal

is corrected as Rs. 1,67,700/-. They are entitled to interest @ 9% 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

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

sv.

MACA.No.971/2004 6

MACA.No.971/2004 7