In assessing compensation for minors in road traffic accidents, courts consider notional income and apply appropriate multipliers, ensuring just compensation for loss of life.

This appeal is at the instance of the legal heirs of deceased Muhammed Shadil, an 8 year old boy, who lost his life in a road traffic accident. They filed OP(MV)No.303 of 2011 before the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, claiming compensation of Rs.4,20,000/-. But the Tribunal awarded only Rs.1,56,000/-. Hence this appeal. 2. The accident occurred on 09.12.2010 at 4.30 p.m., while the deceased boy was knocked down by KL-18/B-4345 motorcycle driven by the 1st respondent, in a rash and negligent manner, while he was walking through Nanmanda-Narikuni road. He sustained fatal injuries and on the date of accident itself, he succumbed to the injuries.

3. The 1st respondent was the owner-cum-rider of the offending motorcycle and 2nd respondent was its Insurer. The 2nd respondent-Insurer admitted the policy.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurer.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that, an 8 year old boy lost his life in the road traffic accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of KL-18/B-4345 motorcycle ridden by the 1st respondent. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is arbitrarily low. He is relying on the decision Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and Others [2013 KHC 4667] to say that the appellants were entitled to get compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. In Kishan Gopal’s case cited supra , the deceased boy was aged 10 years. The Apex Court observed that if the deceased boy had been alive, he would have certainly contributed substantially to the family by working hard. As the deceased boy was 10 years old, assisting parents in their agricultural operations, it was held just and reasonable to take his notional income @ Rs.30,000 per annum. Relying on that decision, this Court is inclined to take the notional income of the deceased boy @ Rs.30,000/- per annum. The multiplier applicable is 15. So, the compensation for loss of dependency could be assessed as Rs.4,50,000/-. Under conventional heads Rs.50,000/- also is to be allowed as per Kishan Gopal’s case cited supra . So, the appellants are entitled to get Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation on the death of the boy Muhammed Shadil.

The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,56,000/-. After deducting that amount, the appellants are entitled to get Rs.3,44,000/-.

6. The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the award amount of Rs.3,44,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Forty Four Thousand only) in the Bank account of the appellants 1 to 4, in the ratio 40:40:10:10, with interest @ 7% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of deposit, (excluding 559 days of delay in filing the appeal), within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The share of the 4th appellant-minor shall be deposited in his name as fixed deposit, till he attains the age of majority. The deposit must be in terms of the directives issued by this Court in Circular No.3 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019 and clarified in O.M.No.D1/ 62475/2016 dated 07/11/2019 after deducting the liabilities, if MACA 1781 of 2013 2024:KER:27072 any, of the appellants towards Tax, balance court fee and legal benefit fund.

The appeal is allowed to the extent as above, and no order is made as to costs.