HIGH COURT OF KERALA
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, P.V.ASHA, JJ
RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI – Appellant
Versus
SANTHOSH JOSEPH – Respondent
MACA 2934/2014
Compensation - Fatal Accident - Act Section List - The court discussed provisions regarding compensation assessment in fatal accidents, clarifying the correct approach to calculating loss of dependency and addressing inconsistencies in previously awarded sums.
Fact of the Case:
Legal heirs of the deceased sought compensation enhancement after the death of a Mahila Prathan Agent in a road accident. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 19,03,500, which the appellants claimed was inadequate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Tribunal had not accurately assessed the deceased's income, leading to an inadequate compensation award. Adjustments were made to reflect the true income and appropriate multipliers.
Issues: Whether the compensation awarded for loss of dependency and other damages was adequate given the deceased's income and the applicable multiplier.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined annual income using a more reliable calculation based on evidence provided, corrected the multiplier applied, and cited relevant precedents to guide awards for loss of love and affection.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and compensation was modified to Rs. 22,88,400.
J UDGMENT
Asha , J., Appellants, who are the legal heirs of deceased Ajithakumari have approached this Court seeking enhancement in compensation. The deceased met with the fatal accident on 29.4.2009, on being knocked down by a bus while she was riding her Kinetic Honda Scooter and succumbed to the injuries. The appellants are her husband, two minor children and her mother. The deceased was aged 44 at the time of the accident. She was working as a Mahila Prathan Agent in the Post office since her appointment as such in the year 1998. Claim petition was filed seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 20 lakhs. Towards loss of dependency, the appellants claimed that she was getting an annual income of Rs. 1,85,562/- during the year 2008 by way of commission, allowances, incentives and bonus.
2. The Tribunal passed an award for a sum of Rs. 19,03,500/-.
A sum of Rs. 17,33,498/- was awarded towards compensation for pecuniary loss caused by the death of the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount awarded under various heads are thoroughly inadequate. The Tribunal did not reckon the income of the deceased correctly, despite documentary evidence proving the same.
3. We heard the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company who vehemently opposed the claim for enhancement. It was submitted that the deceased was only a Mahila Prathan Agent who was getting only commission and there is no fixed salary or income and therefore the amount awarded by the Tribunal was just.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant, on the basis of the documents Exts.A8 to A12 asserted that there was steady increase in income of the deceased and Tribunal should have reckoned the annual income as Rs. 1,85,562/-.
5. In order to prove the income of the deceased PW1 to PW6 were examined and Ext A8 to A16 were marked. Ext A8, A11 and A13 and the deposition of PW3, officer from the office of BDO, show that that the deceased was appointed on 4.8.1998 as Mahila Pradhan-authorised agent under the MPBKY(Mahila Pradhan Khetriya Bachat Yojana) agent of National Savings Scheme attached to the post office at Kulathupuzha in Kulathupuzha Panchayat as per Ext A8 and the agency was being renewed from time to time, as seen from Ext A11 and she was being paid incentive allowance as certified in Ext A13. The incentive allowance for the year 2008-09 was Rs. 80880/-after deducting income tax. Ext.A12 and the depositions of PW4 and PW6-Post mistresses of the concerned Post offices, show that the quantum of commission applicant was getting, had been increasing year to year considerably, from Rs.2200/- in 2000 to Rs. 82090/-in 2008. In 2009 up to the date of her death i.e 29.4.2009, it was Rs. 29429. She was getting a commission of Rs.52000/- in 2005, Rs. 64800/- in 2006, Rs. 68760/- in 2007, Rs. 82090/- in 2008 and it was 29420 for just 4 months in 2009, upto her death. The Deputy Director of National Savings Scheme was examined as PW2 to prove the income of deceased towards bonus as certified in Ext A14 i.e Rs. 19401/-for the year 2008-09, after deduction of income tax and to prove her income towards SAS allowance and SAS bonus-Rs.3320/- as certified in Ext A15, after deducting income tax. Ext.A13 shows the incentive allowance drawn by the deceased during
2000 to 2009 and the corresponding deduction of income tax. The sum of Rs. 21,000/- drawn by her towards allowance in the year 2000 rose to Rs. 88968/- in 2008 and for the period upto her death in April 2009 it is Rs. 31922. Ext A13 shows the increase in her bonus i.e from Rs. 11313 in 2003-04 to Rs. 26850 in 2009-10, which came to Rs.19147/- after deducting the income tax Rs.2163/-. Besides this the deceased was an agent of Life Insurance Corporation of India. Ext A16 certificate issued by the Chief Manager, LIC, who was examined as PW5, shows that she earned a sum of Rs. 8334/-. Her annual income towards at the relevant time is thus seen as : commission : 73381; incentive allowance: 80888; bonus:19147; SAS allowanc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.