IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA.No. 688 of 2001(B)
1. S.D.VAREED @ KUNJUVAREED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SAJU.M.V.,S/O.PAPPU
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.JOSE THETTAYIL
For Respondent :SRI.JOHN KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :10/06/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.
--------------------------------------
M.F.A.No.688 OF 2001
-------------------------------------
Dated 10th June, 2008
JUDGMENT
Koshy,J.
Son of the appellant died in a motor accident on
29.11.1994. He claimed a compensation amounting to Rs.3,82,500/=.
Tribunal, though found that the accident occurred due to the
negligence of the driver of the vehicle insured by the second
respondent insurance company, awarded only Rs.98,700/= as
compensation. Only dispute is regarding the quantum of
compensation. Deceased was aged 28 at the time of accident. He was
employed in a shop. According to the claimant, monthly income of the
deceased was Rs.1,650/=. Ext.A8 is the salary certificate issued by
the Managing Partner of Three Star Agencies, General Merchants &
Commission Agents, Market Road, Angamaly, but, the Tribunal did not
accept the same and Rs.1,200/= was taken as the monthly income.
He was aged 28 years and was employed. We are of the opinion that
at least Rs.1,500/= ought to have been taken as the monthly income.
After deducting one third, loss of family contribution is Rs.1,000/= per
month. It is the contention of the claimant that the deceased was the
only son who was expected to look after him in his old age. Even
MFA.688/2001 2
though multiplier for a 28 year old motor accident victim is fixed as 18
under the second schedule, since the deceased was unmarried, we
have to look into the age of the claimant. Father was aged 53. Taking
guidelines from the second schedule, the apt multiplier is 11. So, for
loss of dependency, compensation payable will be Rs.1,32,000/=.
Tribunal has awarded only Rs.86,400/=. Therefore, additional
amount payable for loss of dependency and family contribution will be
Rs.45,600/=. The deceased died after four days’ treatment in the
hospital and he fought for his life. Ext.A9 series are the medical
bills. No amount was awarded for medical treatment. Life saving
medicines were administered to him. We award Rs.4,000/= for
medical expenses incurred. Only Rs.200/= was awarded for
transportation expenses. He was taken to the hospital by special
vehicle. His body was transported in ambulance. We award Rs.400/=
more for transportation expenses. Since he fought for life for four
days, we are of the opinion that Rs.7,000/= ought to have been
awarded for pain and suffering,. Only Rs.5,000/= was awarded
under this head. So, he is entitled to Rs.2,000/= more on that count.
Thus, additional compensation payable will be Rs.52,000/=. The
above amount of Rs.52,000/= should be deposited by the second
respondent insurance company with 7.5% interest from the date of
application till its deposit, over and above the amount decreed by the
MFA.688/2001 3
Tribunal. On deposit of the amount, appellant is allowed to withdraw
the same.
The appeal is partly allowed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
P.N.RAVINDRAN
JUDGE
tks