IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1391 of 2004()
1. MARIAMMA POULOSE, W/O.POULOSE,
... Petitioner
2. SAJI PAUL, S/O.POULOSE, DO. DO.
3. RAJI PAUL, S/O.POULOSE, DO. DO.
4. LIJI JOSEPH, D/O.POULOSE, DO. DO.
Vs
1. K.M.SALIM, KEYOLOM HOUSE, VENGOLA P.O.
... Respondent
2. V.C.BABU, S/O.V.K.CHACKO,
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
For Respondent :SRI.R.S.KALKURA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :28/08/2009
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
-----------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No.1391 of 2004
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of August, 2009
J U D G M E N T
———————-
Abdul Rehim, J.
1. The wife and children of a person died in a motor
vehicle accident, who were claimants No.1 to 4 before the
Tribunal are in appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation
awarded. Claimants No.5 and 6 before the Tribunal were the
parents of the deceased. They died during pendency of the claim
petition. The accident occurred on 5.11.1997 when an
Autorikshaw knocked down the deceased on a public road. The
Tribunal found that the driver of the Autorikshaw was negligent
in causing the accident and accordingly held that the 3rd
respondent insurance company is liable to pay the compensation.
2. The deceased at the time of the accident was working
as Senior Manager (Works), Hindustan Aeronautics Limited,
Bangalore. He was left with service for a period of 4 years, 4
months and 15 days. Considering his age the Tribunal fixed
multiplier of 8 but calculated dependency based on his salary for
the leftover period of service. For the balance period of 3 years,
7 months and 15 days only a notional income at Rs.2000/- was
MACA.1391/04
2
adopted. The loss of dependency was calculated at Rs.5,94,514/-
and a total compensation of Rs.6,76,514/- was awarded.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellants and the standing counsel for 3rd respondent/insurance
company. On behalf of the appellants it is vehemently contended
that the monthly income adopted for the purpose of computing
loss of dependency was not correct, based on the documentary
evidence adduced with respect to employment and salary of the
deceased. It was pointed out that as per Ext.A7 salary certificate
the salary of the deceased as on 7.11.1997 was Rs.12,206.20/-
including Basic pay, DA, CCA and incentive bonus. Apart from
that he was entitled for allotment of Company Quarters,
conveyance expenditure, free medical facilities, LTC, Ex-gratia
and such other perks. But in Ext.A7 it is further indicated that
his salary was due for revision with effect from 1.1.1997. Ext.X1
is the pay fixation form with respect to the deceased which
showed that his effective grade of basic pay with effect from
1.1.1997 was Rs.14,850/- and further he was entitled to get DA
and all other benefits as stated above based on the re-fixed basic
pay. But the Tribunal adopted monthly earning of the deceased
as Rs.15,000/- and deducting Rs.500/- towards income tax
payment the salary for the purpose of computation is taken as
MACA.1391/04
3
Rs.14,500/- only. The loss of dependency was calculated after
deducting 1/3rd of the said amount towards personal expenses.
According to the learned counsel for the appellants the basic pay
of Rs.14,850/- which came into effect from 1.1.1997 will carry
DA at more than Rs.5000/- per month along with other benefits
like CCA, incentive bonus, etc: and perks like conveyance
expenses, free medical facilities, LTC, allotment of quarters,
Ex-gratia bonus etc. It is also contended that within the leftover
period of 4 years 4 months and 15 days there would have been a
fair change of his salary being increased further. Hence the
contention is that the amount of Rs.14,500/- fixed as monthly
income for computation of loss of dependency is highly
unrealistic and too inadequate. It is also contended that the
notional income @ Rs.2,000/- adopted for computing loss of
dependency for the post retirement period is also unrealistic and
inadequate. Hence the amounts need drastic revision, is the
contention.
3. Considering the fact that there is evidence regarding
increase of the basic pay to Rs.14,850/- we are persuaded to
accept the contention of the appellants. Taking note of all other
monetary and non monetary benefits we are persuaded to re-fix
the net monthly income for the purpose of computation of
MACA.1391/04
4
dependency at Rs.20,000/-. After deducting 1/3rd for personal
expenses the loss of dependency for the period of 4 years 4
months and 15 days need be re-fixed at Rs.7,00,000/-. We are
not inclined to re-fix the notional income for the computation of
dependency for post retirement period. Therefore calculated on
the basis of Rs.2000/-, the loss of income for a period of 3 years,
7 months and 15 days will work out to Rs.58,000/-. This will
entitle the appellants to re-fixation of the total amount of
compensation under the head of loss of dependency as
Rs.7,58,000/-, entitling the appellants for a total enhancement of
compensation by Rs.1,63,486/- (Rs.7,58,000 – Rs.5,94,514).
Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the
total compensation of Rs.6,76,514/- awarded by the Tribunal by a
further sum of Rs.1,63,486/- which will carry interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of the claim petition till payment. The 3rd
respondent/insurance company is directed to make payment of
the amount within a period of three months.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
okb