The court determined compensation based on established precedents and recalculated heads of claims in motor accident compensation cases.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimants in O.P (MV) No.695 of

2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-I, Thodupuzha, dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal. The respondents herein are the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimants, on 12.05.2007 at about 05.55 pm, while the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider on the motorcycle bearing reg. No. KL-6C-5692, a bus bearing registration No.KL-7-AL-1513 driven by the 1^st respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit on the bike. As a result of the accident, he had sustained serious injuries and later succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, being the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹6,36,500/- limited to ₹5,00,000/-.

3. The 1^st respondent/driver and the 2^nd respondent/owner of the offending vehicle remained ex parte before the tribunal. The 3^rd respondent/insurer filed a written statement admitting the validity of the policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Pws 1 and 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A17 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of ₹5,47,500/- as compensation under different heads with interest @8% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs against the 3^rd respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the legal heirs of the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned standing counsel for the respondent/insurer.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants seek enhancement for the compensation under the following heads :

Notional income :- The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that though an amount of ₹7,500/- was claimed as the income of the deceased, who was a salesman by profession, the tribunal had taken only an amount of ₹3,000/-. It is further submitted that, going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236] , the income of a Coolie, for an accident in 2007, is fixed as ₹6,000/- and sought for enhancement of income. Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), in order to award just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to refix the income at ₹6,000/-.

Compensation for loss of dependency :- The deceased was aged 24 years at the time of accident, going by the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)], 40% future prospects is to be added towards the monthly income for calculation of loss of dependency. By adding 40% future prospects towards the monthly income now fixed, the income would be ₹8,400/- (6,000 + 40% of 6,000) for awarding compensation under the head, loss of dependency.

Accordingly, following Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [2010(2) KLT 802(SC)], and Pranay Sethi (supra), the total compensation payable under the head loss of dependency is recalculated thus: ₹9,07,200/- (8,400x12x18x1/2). The tribunal had granted an amount of ₹4,86,000/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹4,21,200/- under the head loss of dependency.

Compensation for loss of estate :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has not granted any compensation towards loss of estate. Going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the compensation under the conventional heads ought to have been fixed at ₹15,000/- each and further, 10% enhan