The court established standards for assessing compensation in motor accident claims, emphasizing evidence of income and dependency.

JUDGMENT

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

1425/2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimants, on 03.09.2009 at about 6.15 p.m., while the deceased Varghese was travelling in a contract carriage bearing Reg.No.KL-07-AA-9237 through Chalakkudy to Malakkapara road. When the vehicle reached near Pathadipalam, the driver lost control, and the vehicle fell into a ditch, 30 feet below the level of the road. As a result the deceased sustained serious injuries, to which he succumbed. The claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹61,69,000/-, which was limited to ₹30,00,000/-.

3. The first respondent/owner filed a written statement contending that the vehicle was insured for third- party risk with a premium of ₹2,820/- covering 12 passengers against a seating capacity of 13. It was also contended that the vehicle had a valid permit and fitness certificate. The second respondent/insurer admitted the insurance policy but only subject to its terms and conditions. It contended that the premium of ₹2,820/- covered risk for 12 passengers only, and the alleged accident occurred due to overloading, which violated the policy conditions. Before the tribunal, Pws 1 to 5 were examined, and Exts.A1 to A24 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a total compensation of ₹8,66,500/- with interest @7.5% per annum against the second respondent, being the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased, 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 mainly challenged the fixation of monthly income by the tribunal. It was submitted that the deceased was aged 41 years and was working as a driver in Safario Trading Co. L.L.C., Dubai. According to the claimants, the deceased was drawing a salary of 5,000 Dirhams, equivalent to Indian currency of ₹65,000/-. In order to support their contentions, they relied on Exts. A21 and A23. Ext. A21 is the salary certificate issued by the aforesaid company stating that the deceased was employed with their company from February 2006 as driver-cum-sales executive, and he had gone for vacation to Kerala on 10.08.2009 and thereafter met with an accident on 03.09.2009. It is further stated in the certificate that he was drawing an amount of 5,000 Dirhams, which is equivalent to ₹65,000/-. Ext. A23 is a statement of accounts of the Federal Bank Limited, Aluva Branch, which reflects that it is an NRE account. The learned counsel also relied on the deposition of PW2 and PW5, who are the wife of the deceased and the Managing Director of the company, respectively. The learned counsel also submitted that PW2 had testified before the tribunal that her husband was working as a driver in Dubai and was earning 5,000 Dirhams monthly. Moreover, PW5 Managing Director of the company, also deposed that the deceased had a monthly salary of AED 5000/-. The learned counsel relying on Ext.A23, the statement of accounts submitted that it reflects transactions from 01.01.2008 to

01.10.2009 and a considerable amount was remitted by the deceased into his account maintained with the Federal Bank Ltd., Aluva branch. Hence, it was argued that the claimant’s claim