IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1016 of 2004()
1. PHILOMINA, W/O.LATE THOMAS,
... Petitioner
2. PRIETO THOMAS, S/O.LATE THOMAS,
3. SHALY THOMAS, D/O.LATE THOMAS,
4. VAREED, S/O.THOMAN,
5. MARY, W/O.VAREED, DO. DO.
Vs
1. P.RAMACHANDRAN, 19, N.G.O.COLONY,
... Respondent
2. A.KARUNAKARAN, S/O.ANGUSWAMY,
3. MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BABY
For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :29/07/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.1016 OF 2004
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellants are claimants in O.P.No.636/1998 on the file of Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda. Claimants are the wife,
children and parents of deceased Thomas, who died in a motor accident
which occurred on June 12, 1998 at about 9.10. a.m. at Potta near
Chalakkudy.
2. The accident happened when the motor cycle ridden by the
deceased was knocked down by a goods carriage bearing Reg.No.TN
41 C 2538. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed
to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment at Govt.Hospital,
Chalakkudy at 9.30 a.m. on the same day
3. Alleging negligence against the driver of the lorry, second
respondent, the claimants filed the O.P. under Section 166 of Motor
Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs against
respondents 1 to 3, the owner, driver and insurer of the offending
MACA.No.1016/2004 2
vehicle. Only third respondent, the insurer of the offending vehicle
contested the case. The third respondent admitted the policy of the
lorry, but contended that there was also negligence on the part of the
deceased.
4. Pws 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.A1 to A14 and Ext.X1
were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. Ext.B1
was marked on the side of the contesting third respondent. On an
appreciation of evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred
due to the negligence on the part of the second respondent, the driver of
the lorry and awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,06,896/- with interest
@ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and
proportionate cost. The claimants have now come up in appeal
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
5. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the
counsel for the Insurance Company.
6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal
that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the
second respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only
question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are
MACA.No.1016/2004 3
entitled to any enhanced compensation.
7. The break up of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is as under :
Loss of dependency - Rs. 9,73,896/-
Pain and suffering - Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of consortium - Rs. 10,000/-
Loss of love and affection - Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral expenses - Rs. 3,000/-
8. Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of
compensation for the loss of dependency.
9. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as
Rs. 8695/- and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, took
Rs. 5797/- as his monthly contribution to his family and adopted a
multiplier of 14 and awarded Rs. 9,73,896/- for the loss of dependency.
10. Deceased was aged 44 at the time of accident and was
working as Electrician in Appolo Tyres and drawing a salary of
Rs. 8695/- as revealed by Ext.X1, the salary particulars of the deceased
which is proved by PW2, the Assistant Manager of Appolo Tyres. On
the basis of Ext.X1, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in adopting his
last drawn salary as his income and deducting 1/3 for his personal
expenses. But the Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 14. As the
MACA.No.1016/2004 4
deceased was aged 44, we feel that a multiplier of 15 would be
reasonable in this case. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the
claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 10,43,460/-. Thus on
this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of
Rs. 69,564/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads,
we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the
same.
11. In the result, the claimant are found entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs. 69,564/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the
date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The third
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.1016/2004 5
MACA.No.1016/2004 6