IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 845 of 2005()
1. NEELIMAVUNGAL BEERANKUTTY,
... Petitioner
2. VALIYAPEEDIKKAL SAFIYA, W/O.BEERANKUTTY,
3. JAMEELA, D/O.BEERANKUTTY,
4. ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.BEERANKUTTY,
5. SIDDIQUE, S/O.BEERANKUTTY, AGED 36 YEARS
6. RASIYABI, D/O.BEERANKUTTY,
7. HARIS, S/O.BEERANKUTTY,
8. SAIFFUNNISA, D/O.BEERANKUTTY,
9. RAMLABI, D/O.BEERANKUTTY,
10. RAIHANATH, D/O.BEERANKUTTY,
11. MOHAMMED THAMMEM,
Vs
1. P.V.BABU, S/O.VASU,
... Respondent
2. M.K.KUTTAN, S/O.KUNHIVELU,
3. M/S.NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO,LTD.,
4. M.K.SUNIL, S/O.KUNHAYYAPPAN,
5. M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.M.A.GEORGE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :06/12/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
M.A.C.A.No. 845 of 2005
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellants are the claimants in O.P.(MV) No.808 of
2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Manjeri. They are parents, brothers and sisters of deceased
Mohammed Koya who died in a motor accident. In this
appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the
Tribunal dated December 9, 2004 awarding a compensation
of Rs.1,13,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of
death of Mohammed Koya in a motor accident.
2. The accident happened on August 9, 1999 at about
12 O’ clock in the night. Deceased Mohammed Koya was
driving his car bearing registration No.KL-8/C-8889 from
Kodakkad to Kottakkal. When the car reached at
Pookiparambu, it collided head on with a mini lorry bearing
registration No.KL-8/E-1130, driven by the 1st respondent.
Mohammed Koya sustained serious injuries and he
succumbed to the injuries sustained on the way to hospital.
MACA 845/2005 2
Alleging negligence against the 1st respondent, the
claimants filed the O.P. before the Tribunal claiming a
compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- for the loss caused to them
on account of the death of Mohammed Koya in the accident.
3. Respondents 1and 2, the driver and owner of the
offending mini lorry, remained absent before the Tribunal.
The 3rd respondent, insurer of the offending mini lorry, filed
a written statement, admitting the policy. Respondents 4
and 5 are the owner and insurer of the car.
4. This O.P. was jointly tried along with other Original
Petitions filed by the legal heirs of other deceased persons
in the accident and a common award was passed.
5. PW1 was examined and Exts. A1 to A6 were
marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was
adduced by the respondents. The Tribunal, on an
appreciation of the evidence, found that the accident
occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent and
awarded a compensation of Rs.1,13,000/- with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till
MACA 845/2005 3
realization and cost of Rs.4,000/-. The claimants have come
up in appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and
the learned counsel for the Insurance Company.
7. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the
Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of
the 1st respondent, driver of the offending mini lorry, is not
challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question,
which arises for consideration, is whether the claimants are
entitled to any enhanced compensation ?
8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
Rs.1,13,000/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as
under:-
Transport to hospital : Rs. 1,000/-
Funeral expenses : Rs. 2,000/-
Loss of estate : Rs.1,10,000/-
------------------
Total : Rs.1,13,000/-
========
9. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
MACA 845/2005 4
no compensation was awarded for the loss of dependency,
loss of love and affection and for pain and suffering endured
by the deceased.
10. The Tribunal took the annual income of the
deceased as Rs.15,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd for his
personal expenses, balance amount of Rs.10,000/- was
taken as his annual contribution to his family, adopted a
multiplier of 11 and awarded Rs.1,10,000/- for the loss of
loss of estate. It was actually compensation awarded for the
loss of dependency. The deceased was working as a driver
and earning Rs.3,000/- per month, according to PW1.
Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that
monthly income of the claimant can reasonably be fixed at
Rs.3,000/-, after deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses,
balance amount of Rs.2,000/- can be taken as his monthly
contribution to his family, which comes to Rs.24,000/- per
annum. Multiplier of 11 adopted by the Tribunal is not
seriously challenged. Thus, the claimants are entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs.2,64,000/- for loss of
MACA 845/2005 5
dependency. Thus on this count the claimants are entitled
to a compensation of Rs.1,54,000/-.
11. No compensation was seen awarded by the
Tribunal towards loss of love and affection. Taking into
consideration the age of the deceased and the age of the
claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs.50,000/- would
be reasonable for the loss of love and affection.
12. No compensation was seen awarded for pain and
suffering endured by the deceased. Taking into
consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the
deceased, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would
be reasonable on this count.
13. The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,10,000/- for loss of
estate, but it was actually compensation awarded for the
loss of dependency. Therefore, we feel that separate
compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable for the
loss of estate. As regards the compensation awarded under
other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and
therefore,we are not disturbing the same.
MACA 845/2005 6
14. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to
additional compensation of Rs.2,24,000/-.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 realization and
proportionate costs. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company
shall deposit the amount within two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the
claimants. 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.
mn.