Kerala High Court
Shyja.K.T vs Instrumentation Engineer on 20 October, 2010
Bench: A.K.Basheer, P.Q.Barkath Ali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 3047 of 2009()
1. SHYJA.K.T, AGED 28 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. SANU DEV, DAUGHTER OF SAHADEVAN,
3. PRIYA DEV, DAUGHTER OF SAHADEVAN,
4. VELU, AGED 65 YEARS.
5. THANKAM, WIFE OF VELU, AGED 54 YEARS,
Vs
1. INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEER,
... Respondent
2. RAMAKRISHNAN.K.T, SON OF KUNHATAN,
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM
For Respondent :SRI.P.JAYASANKAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :20/10/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.3047 OF 2009
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
Barkath Ali, J.
Appellants are the claimants in OP(MV)No.1035/2006 on the file of Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode. They are the wife, children and parents of deceased Sahadevan, who died in a motor accident. On September 23, 2005, while the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg.No. KEK 9188 and reached near Karadi Petrol Bunk, a jeep bearing Reg.No. KL-10-E-8106 came from behind and knocked him down. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital on the same day. Alleging negligence against the driver of the jeep, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.
2. Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending jeep filed written statement before the Tribunal admitting the accident, but contended that the accident occurred due to the MACA.No.3047/09 2 negligence of the deceased. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending jeep filed a written statement admitting the policy of the jeep.
3. Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the jeep and awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,63,500/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company.
5. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the jeep is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation.
MACA.No.3047/09 3
6. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,63,500/-. The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:
Dependency - Rs. 3,40,000/-
Consortium - Rs. 10,000/-
Love and affection - Rs. 5,000/-
Pain and suffering - Rs. 5,000/-
Funeral expenses - Rs. 2,500/-
Transportation - Rs. 1,000/-
7. The Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of the compensation for the loss of dependency, for loss of love and affection, for loss of consortium and for loss to the estate.
8. The Tribunal took the annual income of the deceased as Rs. 30,000/- and after deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, took the balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- as annual contribution to his family and adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded Rs. 3,40,000/- for loss of dependency. The deceased was a Mason earning Rs.6,000/- per month, according to the claimants. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 3,500/- which comes to Rs. 42,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of MACA.No.3047/09 4 Rs. 28,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. As the deceased was aged 30 at the time of accident, the proper multiplier that can be adopted is 17. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 4,76,000/- ( 28,000 x 17). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,36,000/-.
9. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/- for loss of love and affection which appears to be quite inadequate. Taking into consideration the age of the widow and children, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable on this count.
10. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 10,000/- for loss of consortium which appears to be very low. Taking into consideration the fact that the first claimant widow was aged 28 at the time of the accident, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- would be reasonable on this count.
11. No compensation was awarded for loss to the estate for which we feel that a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- would be adequate. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the MACA.No.3047/09 5 same to the reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same.
12. In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,56,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7% 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.3047/09 6