IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 757 of 2007()
1. PATHU POTTAYIL, AGED 54 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. MOIDEEN, AGED 40 YEARS,
3. JAMEELA, AGED 38 YEARS,
4. AYSHA, AGED 34 YEARS,
5. ASHRAF, AGED 28 YEARS,
6. SAHEED, AGED 22 YEARS,
Vs
1. K.NAINAR, AGED 30 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. K.JALAL, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O KADER,
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
4. SOOPY, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O AMMAD,
5. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.J.ANTONY
For Respondent :SRI.A.R.GEORGE
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. 757 of 2007
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
In this appeal under section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act claimants in O.P.(MV) No.451 of 2000 of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kalpetta, Wayanad
challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated
August 21, 2006 awarding a compensation of Rs.1,26,500/-
for the loss caused to them, on account of the death of one
Ammed in a motor accident.
2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are these:-
Deceased Ammed was aged 60 at the time of the accident
and used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as a fish seller.
Claimants are his wife and major married children. On June
4, 2000 at about 6 a.m. deceased Ammed was pillion riding
on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KL.12A/6047 from
Mananthavady to Kaniyaram. The motor cycle was ridden
by fourth respondent. When they reached near “B” street, a
MACA 757/2007 2
jeep bearing registration No.KL.10G/6447, driven by first
respondent, came at a high speed and dashed against the
motor cycle. Ammed sustained serious injuries and he
succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing
treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode on
June 6, 2000. According to the claimants, the accident
occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first
respondent, driver of the offending jeep. The first
respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner
and third respondent as the insurer of the offending jeep
are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to
the claimants who are the dependents and legal heirs of the
deceased. Respondents 4 and 5 are the owner-cum-driver
and insurer of the motor cycle.
3. Respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the
offending jeep, remained absent before the Tribunal. The
third respondent, insurer of the offending jeep filed a
written statement, admitting the policy and further
contended that there was also negligence on the part of the
MACA 757/2007 3
rider of the motor cycle. Fourth respondent, owner-cum-
rider of the motor cycle, on which the claimant was pillion
riding at the time of the accident, remained absent before
the Tribunal. Fifth respondent, insurer of the said motor
cycle, filed written statement, admitting the policy and
further contended that the accident occurred due to the
negligence of the first respondent.
4. PW1 was examined and Exts. A1 to A6 were
marked on the side of the claimants. Exts.B1 and B2 were
marked on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal, on an
appreciation of the evidence, awarded a compensation of
Rs.1,26,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the
date of petition till realization and costs. The claimants have
come up in appeal, challenging the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned counsel for respondents 3 and 5.
6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the
Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence
MACA 757/2007 4
on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this
appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for
consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any
enhanced compensation ?
7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of
Rs.1,26,500/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is
as under:-
Transport to hospital : Rs. 2,000/-
Extra-nourishment : Rs. 500/-
Medical expenses : Rs. 1,000/-
Pain and suffering : Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of love and affection : Rs. 25,000/-
Funeral expenses : Rs. 3,000/-
Loss of dependency : Rs. 80,000/-
------------------
Total : Rs.1,26,500/-
========
8. The learned counsel for the claimants sought
enhancement of the compensation for the loss of
dependency. He also pointed out that no compensation was
awarded for the loss of consortium and loss of estate.
9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the
deceased as Rs.2,000/-. After deducting 1/3 for his personal
MACA 757/2007 5
expenses, Rs.16,000/- per annum was taken as his annual
contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier
of 5 and awarded a compensation of Rs.80,000/- for loss of
dependency. The second claimant as PW1 testified that the
deceased was a Fish Merchant and earning Rs.6,000/- per
month, which is disputed by the contesting respondents.
Taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was a
Fish Merchant, we feel that his monthly income can
reasonably be estimated at Rs.3,000/- per month. After
deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, Rs.2,000/- per
month will be taken as his monthly contribution to his
family, which works out Rs.24,000/- per annum. The
multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 5 is not seriously
challenged. Therefore, for the loss of dependency, the
claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,20,000/-.
Thus, the claimants are entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs.40,000/- on this count.
10. For loss of consortium, no compensation is seen
awarded by the Tribunal. The deceased was aged 60 and his
MACA 757/2007 6
wife, first claimant, was aged 54 at the time of the accident.
Therefore, for the loss of consortium, we feel that a
compensation of Rs.15,000/- would be reasonable.
11. No compensation was awarded for loss of estate.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case, we feel that a compensation of Rs.5,000/- would be
reasonable on this count. .
12. There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal
awarded interest at 6% per annum, which appears to be
very low. The claimants are entitled to interest at 7.5% per
annum on the compensation already awarded as well as for
the additional compensation awarded. As regards the
compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same
to be reasonable and therefore, we are not disturbing the
same.
13. In the result, the claimants are entitled to an
additional compensation of Rs.60,000/- with interest at 7.5%
p.a. from the date of petition till realization and
proportionate costs. The order of the Tribunal is modified as
MACA 757/2007 7
found above. The third respondent Insurance Company shall
deposit the amount within two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of as above.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE.
P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE.
mn.