IMPORTANT POINTS
The compensation payable under the un-amended Section 163A is Rs.2,40,000/-, it can be seen, though it is provided in the Second Schedule that the notional income of a non-earning person shall be reckoned at Rs.15,000/-, the notional income in respect of children below the age of 15 is actually contemplated to be reckoned at Rs.24,000 as the notional income of the children died in accidents till the end of the financial year 1995-96.

JUDGMENT :

The questions arising for consideration in these matters are common and they are, therefore, disposed of by this common judgment. The questions relate to computation of compensation in cases involving death of children in motor accidents, in terms of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act).

2. Before proceeding to formulate and consider the questions, it is necessary to give an outline of the basic facts and the contentions raised by the parties.

3. Among the appeals, M.A.C.A. No.115 of 2016 is one preferred by the insurer in a proceedings for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and M.A.C.A.No.1018 of 2016 is by the claimants in the said proceedings. The claimants in the proceedings are the father and elder brother of one Athul Prasad who died in a motor accident on 27.01.2014. Athul Prasad was aged 8 years. Rs.10,00,000/-was the claim made in the proceedings. As against the said claim, the Tribunal has granted to the claimants Rs.6,75,000/- by way of compensation. The said sum of Rs.6,75,000/- includes Rs.4,80,000/-granted towards loss of dependency. According to the insurer, the compensation granted by the Tribunal under the aforesaid and other heads are excessive and according to the claimants, they are grossly inadequate.

4. M.A.C.A.No.1459 of 2013 is also an appeal preferred by the insurer in a proceedings for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal challenging the decision of the Tribunal. The claimants in the said proceedings are the parents of another 8 year old boy, namely, Siraj who died in a motor accident on 27.3.2010. Rs.5,00,000/-was the claim made in the proceedings. As against the said claim, the Tribunal has granted to the claimants Rs.5,65,000/-by way of compensation. The said sum of Rs.5,65,000/-includes Rs.5,40,000/-granted towards loss of dependency. According to the insurer, the compensation granted by the Tribunal under the aforesaid and other heads are excessive.

5. M.A.C.A.No.2111 of 2014 is also an appeal preferred by the insurer in a proceedings for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal challenging the decision of the Tribunal. The claimants in the said proceedings are the parents of a girl aged 3 years, namely, Anamika who died in a motor accident took place on 11.2.2011. Rs.6,00,000/-was the claim made in the proceedings. As against the said claim, the Tribunal has granted to the claimants Rs.4,55,000/-by way of compensation. The said sum of Rs.4,55,000/-includes Rs.2,00,000/-granted towards loss of dependency. According to the insurer, the compensation granted by the Tribunal under the aforesaid and other heads are excessive.

6. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the insurers is that compensation for loss of dependency cannot be computed in all cases involving death of children, applying multiplier method. According to them, in cases involving death of children below the age of 10 years, it may not be appropriate to compute compensation for loss of dependency applying the multiplier method, as there will not be any materials on record in such cases to make an estimation of the notional income of the deceased, which is required for the purpose of computation. It was the submission of the learned counsel that in such cases, only a consolidated amount can be granted by way of compensation under that head. The learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of this court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ajith [2002 (3) KLT 330], in support of the said contention. According to the learned counsel, in all the three cases dealt with in these matters, the age of the children being below ten years, a consolidated sum should have been granted by the Tribunal towards compensation for loss of dependency and the compensation computed and granted in their cases applying the multiplier method are liable to be interfered with.