The main legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation in motor vehicle accident cases, considering the deceased's income, loss of love and affection, loss of estate, and loss of dependency, as guided by the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and relevant legal precedents.

T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.

This appeal is filed by the appellants who are claimants before the Tribunal. This is a case where one late Shaji had suffered injuries in an accident which took place on 24.3.2007 at 3.15 p.m. He was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KL-9U/6017 towards Pathirippala along with one Shri Ummer as a pillion rider. The offending vehicle is a tipper lorry bearing Reg. No. KL4 Q/7596 which was owned by the first respondent. The Tribunal found in favour of the claimants and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,47,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from 2.7.2007. The total claim was for Rs. 18 Lakhs. In this appeal the appellants are seeking enhancement in compensation on various grounds. We heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the insurance company.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased was a welder and was running a welding workshop known as Ganapathy Engineering Works, Nagaripuram at Pathirappala. The monthly income claimed in the petition was Rs. 10,000/-. For the reason that no documentary evidence has been produced to prove the income, the Tribunal adopted a notional income at Rs. 5,000/- per month.

3. Before this Court the appellants have produced Annexure 1 along with I.A. No. 1450/2015 which is a letter issued by one Shri K. Sreekumaran. According to him, he is now managing the welding workshop which was being conducted by the deceased and is getting an average net income of Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per month after meeting all the expenses. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the same can be safely accepted by this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the insurance company objected to the marking of the above document. We have perused the said letter. We will not be justified in assessing the income of the deceased based on a letter issued by the person who is conducting the workshop which was being run by the deceased. It does not reflect any details regarding the income the deceased was getting from the welding workshop. Therefore, we reject the petition, I.A. No. 1450/2015 for accepting the said document.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants then submitted that this Court can fix a reasonable amount, since the claim at Rs. 10,000/- is not exorbitant. It is submitted that the deceased was a welder and since he was a skilled worker, he would have been able to obtain a very good income. Learned counsel for the insurance company submitted that there should have been better evidence in the matter. We are of the view that for assessing compensation in a case like this where direct evidence by way of documents may not be there regarding the monthly income, the court or tribunal can reckon a proper income by guess work also. The accident in this case occurred in the year 2007. The deceased was aged 30 at the time of accident. That he was getting a very good income, is clear. His occupation stands proved by Ext. A9 licence to conduct welding works for the relevant period, i.e. from 13.11.2006 to 31.3.2007. Even though Rs. 5,000/- was adopted by the Tribunal as the monthly income, being a skilled worker and in the light of the fact that the wage structure in the State may result in better income for the deceased, we find it proper to fix Rs. 7,000/- as the monthly income. The deceased was a bachelor and therefore 50% of the income will have to be set apart for personal and living expenses, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121. The learned counsel for the appellant raised a contention that in the light of the fact that the deceased was supporting the entire family it may be reckoned as 1/3rd of the total income. But the relaxation in such a matter is possible only if there is evidence to show that there were large number of members depending upon the deceased, which is absent in this case. Therefore, we fe