The court established that in case of motor accident claims, notional income must be assessed based on relevant judgments, ensuring just and reasonable compensation is awarded, and clarified the treatment of loss of consortium and funeral expenses.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimants in OP (MV) No.612 of

2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kollam, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein was the second respondent before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimants, on 02.02.2011, at about

02.00 p.m., the deceased sustained injuries in front of S.B.T. Poruvazhy in Kadampanadu – Bharanikkavu public road, when the offending motorcycle bearing Registration No. KL-24B-8394 hit him due to the rash and negligent riding of the first respondent. Due to the accident, the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to those injuries. The claimants who are the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹5,00,000/- which is limited to ₹4,00,000/-.

3. The first respondent, the owner-cum-rider of the offending vehicle filed a written statement, contending that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the deceased, who was an aged person. The second respondent, insurer filed a written statement, admitting the insurance policy, denying the liability and disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A9 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the first respondent and the appellants/claimants were awarded a total compensation of ₹83,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization 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 insurer.

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

I. Notional Income The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though an amount of ₹10,000/- was claimed as the monthly income of the deceased, who was a coolie, the tribunal had taken only an amount of ₹1,250/-. The learned counsel further submitted that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236] , the monthly income of a coolie for an accident in 2011 is taken at ₹8,000/- and sought enhancement of the income. Accordingly, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (Supra) and in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to re-

fix the notional monthly income at ₹8,000/-.

II. Loss of dependency Since the notional monthly income is re-fixed as ₹8,000/-, following the apex court judgments in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017 (4) KLT 662] and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [2010(2) KLT 802] , the total compensation payable under the afore head is recalculated thus ₹3,20,000/- (8,000 x 12 x 5 x 2/3). The tribunal had granted an amount of ₹50,000/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹2,70,000/-

under the afore head.

III. Funeral expenses On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal had awarded an amount of ₹25,000/- under the head funeral expenses, whereas the appellants were entitled only for an amount of ₹15,000/-. Following the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), I find that they are entitled for a total amount of ₹15,000/-. Hence, there will be a deduction of ₹10,000/-

under the head funeral expenses.

IV. Loss of estate Though an amount of ₹50,000/- was claimed by the appellants towards the head loss of estate, the tribunal had not awarded any amount. Following the j