IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 666 of 2001(B)
1. MOIDEEN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. P.V. PREMKUMAR
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.O.P.NANDAKUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :19/02/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ.
--------------------------------------
M.F.A.No.666 OF 2001
-------------------------------------
Dated 19th February, 2008
JUDGMENT
Koshy,J.
A minor girl aged 7 sustained fatal injuries in a motor
accident on 5.7.1997. After fighting for life for two months, she
succumbed to the injuries on 6.9.1997. Her father and mother applied
for a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/=. Total amount awarded by the
Tribunal was Rs.1,43,900/= after holding that the accident occurred due
to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the third
respondent insurance company. The only dispute is regarding the
quantum of compensation. The accident occurred on 5.7.1997. The
deceased was only a student and she was not an earning member, but,
loss of a child cannot be estimated in terms of money. Compensation
has to be calculated on some scientific basis. As held by a three member
bench of the Supreme Court in Smt.Supe Dei and others v.
M/s.National Insurance Company Ltd. and another (JT 2002
(Suppl.1) SC 451) and recently in A.P.S.R.T.C. v. Pentaiah Chary (2007
AIR SCW 5689) second schedule can be taken for guidance in claims
under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act also for assessing
compensation. In 1994 when second schedule was framed, notional
MFA.666/2001 2
income of a non-earning person was fixed at Rs.15,000/= per year
(Rs.1,250/= per month). Even though it was argued that since the
accident occurred after three years, a higher notional income should
be taken, we are not accepting the same. Therefore, annual notional
income of the deceased is fixed as Rs.15,000/=. One third has to be
deducted for personal expenses and Rs.10,000/= should be taken as
the multiplicand. Deceased was aged only 7 years. As per the second
schedule, 15 is the apt multiplier. Considering the age of the father
(32 years), it is 17 and considering the age of mother (26 years) 18 is
the apt multiplier. However, in the case of death of an unmarried
person, lowest of the multiplier is to be taken. Therefore, we take 15
as the multiplier. If that be so, compensation payable for the death
and loss of family contribution will be Rs.1,50,000/= (10,000 x 15).
Tribunal has awarded only Rs.62,400/= on this count. So, the
additional amount payable will be Rs.87,600/=. Even though it was
contended that in claims under section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act
negligence of the offending vehicle need not be proved, in claims
under section 166 of the M.V.Act that has to be proved and a higher
amount should be granted, that submission cannot be accepted. For
pain and sufferings no amount was awarded by the Tribunal. Tribunal
has granted Rs.14,500/= for loss of love and affection, funeral
expenses, loss of estate etc. This is a case under section 166 of the
MFA.666/2001 3
M.V. Act. The deceased was under treatment for two months. She
sustained very serious injuries. She has an enduring pain for two
months. In view of the crush injuries etc., we are of the opinion that
at least Rs.15,000/= ought to have been awarded for pain and
suffering. Immediately after the accident she was taken to the
hospital from the place of incident and after death dead body has to
be taken from the hospital to the house. Therefore, we award
Rs.2,000/= for transportation expenses and Rs.3,000/= for funeral
expenses. Thus, the total amount payable under these heads will be
Rs.20,000/=. From the above amount Rs.14,500/= awarded by the
Tribunal has to be deducted. Hence, the additional amount payable
will be Rs.5,500/=. Medical bills amounting to Rs.79,830.13 were
produced, but, Tribunal has granted only Rs.67,000/= as per the
receipt from the hospital. Other than the receipt from the hospital,
there would be expenses for purchasing medicines from outside as
life saving medicines were given to her to save her life and there
would be other expenses not covered by the bills. We are of the
opinion that at least Rs.10,000/= more should have been granted for
medical expenses. Thus, the additional compensation payable will be
Rs.1,03,100/=. The above amount should be deposited by the third
respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of
application till its deposit, over and above the amount decreed by the
MFA.666/2001 4
Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, appellants are allowed to
withdraw the same in equal proportion.
The appeal is partly allowed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
K.HEMA
JUDGE
tks