IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that employed dependents are entitled to claim compensation, and the calculation of future income should consider specific reasons and evidence available on record, including non-financial dependency.

JUDGMENT :

These appeals are directed against the award in OP (MV) No. No.1105 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala. MACA No.210 of 2015 is filed by the 3rd respondent/insurer challenging the award, as it is excessive in nature and MACA No.1219 of 2015 is filed by the claimants against the very same award, alleging that the award amount is too low.

2. On 03.08.2012, Sri.T.I Krishnan, an Assistant Engineer working in Public Works Department met with a road traffic accident while he was driving his car through Pala-Thodupuzha road. KL-38/B-1833 bus driven by the 1st respondent, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against his car and he sustained fatal injuries. He breathed his last on his way to hospital. He was aged only 51 and was drawing monthly salary of Rs.47,860/- as on the date of accident. He was survived by his wife and three children. They approached the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.69 lakh, and learned Tribunal awarded Rs.44,04,912/- which, according to the insurer, is highly excessive and quite inadequate according to the claimants.

3. 1st respondent was the driver, 2nd respondent was the owner and 3rd respondent was the insurer of the offending bus. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent contested the case, but admitted the policy as well as the accident.

4. On analysing the facts and evidence, learned Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the 1st respondent. So, 2nd respondent/owner was found vicariously liable. Since that vehicle was duly insured with the 3rd respondent, the insurer was found liable to indemnify the insured and thereby to compensate the claimants.

5. In MACA No.210 of 2015 filed by the insurer, the main dispute is regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. According to them, the monthly income of the deceased fixed by the Tribunal as well as the multiplier applied, are incorrect. The deceased had left only four years of service for his superannuation and so, learned Tribunal could have taken his monthly salary till his retirement only, and thereafter his pension alone could have been taken for determining dependency compensation. Moreover, the wife of the deceased was working as an Overseer in the Irrigation Department and his elder daughter was an MBBS Doctor. So, they could not have been treated as dependants of the deceased, and hence learned Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased, instead of 1/4th.

6. The claimants are assailing the award on the ground that, the compensation awarded towards funeral expenses, loss of estate, loss of love and affection, loss of future income etc., are on the lower side.

7. Now this Court is called upon to answer whether there is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the impugned Award warranting interference by this Court.

8. Heard learned counsel for the insurer (appellant in MACA No.210 of 2015) and learned counsel for the claimants (appellants in MACA No.1219 of 2015).

9. For the purpose of convenience, the appellant in MACA No.210 of 2015 shall be referred as the insurer and the appellants in MACA No.1219 of 2015 shall be referred as the claimants.

10. Admittedly, the deceased was a 51 year old Assistant Engineer, having only four years to retire from service. The grievance of the insurer is that, the Tribunal, ignoring the fact that, the deceased could have obtained salary as per the salary certificate, only till his retirement, applied multiplier of 9 on his annual salary, instead of adopting a split multiplier, i.e. 4 years prior to his retirement and 5 years after his retirement. Moreover, claimants 1 and 2 were employed and they were not dependent on the deceased and therefore, 1/3rd had to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased.

11. Ext.A11 pay slip of the deceased will show that, at the time of death, he was drawing monthly salary of Rs.47