Sathyamma v. A.Asharaf
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/30TH MAGHA, 1936 MACA.No. 1747 of 2011 ( ) -------------------------- AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 459/1999 of MACT, MAVELIKKARA DATED 30-12-2010 APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 2 AND 3:
------------------------
1. SATHYAMMA, KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, MAVELIKKARA WARD II FROM KADAVANESHATHU VEEDU, PANMANA, WARD VIII KARUNAGAPALLY
2. ARUNKUMAR, KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, MAVELIKKARA WARD II FROM KADAVANESHATHU VEEDU, PANMANA, WARD VIII KARUNAGAPALLY BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP SMT.NAVA VARGHESE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
1. A.ASHARAF, NAHAZ MANZIL, PALLANA P.O, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA 690 515
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD;KOLLAM 691 001 R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.V.ASHA, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1747 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of February, 2015
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
In this appeal by the appellants, who are claimants before the Tribunal, are challenging the quantum of compensation. Against the total amount claimed at Rs.4,56,500/-, the Tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs.2,18,000/-.
2.
The deceased late Sri.Ajith Kumar sustained injuries in an accident which occurred on Kollam-Alappuzha road on 07/03/1999 at about 6.30 a.m. He was travelling in an autorickshaw and the offending vehicle, a Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.KL-4E-4066 hit the same. He succumbed to the injuries later. It was claimed that the deceased was aged 26 and was a qualified Electrician and Ext.A14 is the copy of the National Trade Certificate. The Tribunal fixed the monthly income at Rs.3,000/- for fixing the contribution to the family as against the claim of Rs.4,000/-.
3.
We reproduce below the table under which amounts have been granted by the Tribunal :
Damage to clothing Pain and suffering Medical expenses Loss of dependency 198000 Love and affection Transportation & ambulance charge Funeral expenses Total 218000 4.
The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the claim of the appellants for fixing the monthly income at Rs.4,000/- ought to have been allowed. It is also submitted that the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering, loss of love and affection and funeral expenses is too low and no amount has been granted towards loss of estate.
5.
The learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that fixation of monthly income is perfectly in order as the accident occurred in the year 1999.
6.
It is not the case of the appellants that the deceased was earning on a regular scale of pay and it is pointed out that he was self employed. Therefore we find that the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is reasonable. But the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is incorrect. It is taken as 11 considering the age of the first petitioner before the Tribunal namely the father of the deceased. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation ( 2010(2) KLT 802 (SC), the age of the deceased will have to be reckoned . Going by the said judgment, the multiplier is 17. 7.
We therefore are of the view that the compensation will have to be recomputed and due amounts will have to be awarded towards loss of dependency, funeral expenses and loss of estate. 8.
Accordingly, we refix the compensation in the following manner :
Damage to clothing Pain and suffering Medical expenses
Loss of dependency 306000 (3000 x 12 x17x50%) Love and affection 100000 Transportation & ambulance charge Funeral expenses 25000 Loss of estate 25000 Total 467000 (Rupees four lakhs sixty seven thousand only) 9.
The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum. We direct the Insurance Company to deposit the amount within a period of three months. The compensation amount shall be shared in between the appellants in the ratio of 80:20. The parties will suffer their costs in the appeal.
The appeal is accordingly allowed.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE P.V.ASHA, JUDGE sv.