The court can enhance compensation based on reassessed income and dependency despite prior tribunal findings.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by claimants in O.P.(MV) No.

2025/2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimants, on 05.07.2016 at about

9.10 p.m., while the deceased was riding a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL- 7BY 7218 through NGO quarters to Kunnumpuram road, a car bearing Reg.No.KL-58-L-642 driven by the second respondent, in a rash and negligent manner hit the motorcycle. As a result, the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The legal heirs of the deceased approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹25,00,000/-.

3. The 1st respondent/the owner of the offending vehicle remained ex-parte before the tribunal. The 2^nd respondent/driver filed a written statement contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased himself. The 3^rd respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed and also contended that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the rider of the motorcycle. Exts.A1 to A16 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a total compensation of ₹17,42,600/- with interest @8% per annum against the respondent insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurance company.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants claims enhancement mainly under the following heads :-

Notional income :- The learned counsel for the claimants submitted that though an amount of ₹12,000/- was claimed as the income of the deceased who was a third semester B.tech student, the tribunal had taken only an amount of ₹10,000/-. The learned standing counsel for the insurance company submitted that the claimants have claimed only an amount of ₹12,000/- as the notional income. Considering the fact that the deceased was a third semester B.tech student, and in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to re-fix the income at ₹14,000/-. Since the deceased was aged 20 years at the time of the accident, by adding 40% future prospects as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017(4) KLT 662(SC)], to the income now fixed, the amount will be ₹19,600/- for awarding compensation under the head loss of dependency.

Loss of dependency :- Since the notional income after adding future prospects is re-fixed as ₹19,600/-, following the judgments in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [2010(2) KLT 802(SC)], the compensation payable under the head loss of dependency is re-calculated thus as: (19600 x 12 x 18 x 1/2) ₹21,16,800/-. The tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹15,12,000/- under the head loss of dependency. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹6,04,800/- under the said head.

Loss of consortium :- The learned counsel for the claimants submitted that no amount was awarded under the head loss of consortium. On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹1,00,000/- towards the head, loss of love and affection. Since there is no appeal filed by the insurance company, I am not inclined to interfere with the same.

6. Though the appellants/claimants claimed enhancement of compensation under the other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I do not find any reason to interfere with the compensation awarded by the tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable.

7. Thus, the impugned a