IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1111 of 2008()
1. IBRAHIM,S/O.MOIDEEN,AGED 49,
... Petitioner
2. PATHU,W/O.IBRAHIM,AGED 43,
3. MOIDU,S/O.IBRAHI,
4. KUNHAYISHA,W/O.SOOPPY,
5. SALMA,W/O.AZEEZ,
6. SUBAIDA,W/O.SULAIMAN,
Vs
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :27/09/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No. 1111 OF 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 27th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)496/2004 on the file of
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vadakara. They are the parents,
bother and sisters of deceased Mansoor 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
MACA.No.1111/2008 2
offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy of the
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.2,04,000/-
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.
MACA.No.1111/2008 3
6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,04,000/-.
The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:
Loss of dependency - Rs.1,76,000/-
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 loss of love
and affection.
8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as
Rs.2000/- and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the
balance amount of Rs. 16,000/- was taken was his annual contribution
to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 11 and awarded
Rs. 1,76,000/- for loss of dependency. According to the claimants,
deceased was a Painter aged 20, earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. Ext.A8
is the certificate of the Village Officer to that effect. Taking into
consideration this aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the
deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs.3,000/- which comes to
Rs. 36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal
expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 24,000/- can be taken as his
MACA.No.1111/2008 4
annual contribution to his family. Deceased was aged 20 at the time of
the accident which is not disputed. His father was aged 54 and mother
aged about 48 at the time of the accident as revealed from Ext.A4, the
Family Membership Certificate produced by the claimants. Therefore,
we feel that a multiplier of 13 would be reasonable in this case. Thus
calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a
compensation of Rs. 3,12,000/- ( 24,000 x 13). Thus on this count, the
claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,36,000/-.
9. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 25,000/- for loss of love and
affection . Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and in the
circumstances of the case, we feel that an additional compensation of
Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable for the loss of love and affection. As
regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same
to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.
10. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded
interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The
claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also
MACA.No.1111/2008 5
for the enhanced compensation.
11. In the result, the appellants/claimants are found entitled to
an additional compensation of Rs. 1,51,000/-. 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. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. The
respondent/second 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.1111/2008 6
MACA.No.1111/2008 7