Court recalculated compensation, emphasizing the need for just and reasonable awards based on appropriate income evaluation, and adjusted amounts for loss of dependency and related losses.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimants in OP(MV)

No.241 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimants, on 23.03.2008 at about 11.10 a.m, while the deceased was travelling in a motorcycle bearing Reg. KL-38/5626 along the Pala- Thodupuzha road, a KSRTC bus bearing Reg. No.KL-15/4424 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit on the motorcycle, whereby she sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same on the same day. The claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹10,00,000/-.

3. The first and second respondents/the driver and the registered owner of the offending vehicle, respectively, filed a written statement contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the motorcycle and disputing the compensation claimed and denying negligence. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A25 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹7,81,000/- with interest @8.5% per annum as compensation under different heads against the 2^nd respondent/owner/KSRTC. 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. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent/ KSRTC.

5. The appellants claimed enhancement mainly under the following heads :-

Notional income:- The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that an amount of ₹5,000/- was claimed as the income of the deceased and the tribunal had accepted the said amount and awarded compensation. The learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [2011 (13) SCC 236] , the income of an ordinary person for an accident in 2008 is fixed at ₹6,500/- and sought for enhancement of the income. In order to award just and reasonable compensation following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I find it appropriate to refix the income as ₹6,500/-. Since the deceased was aged 35 years at the time of the accident, by adding 40% future prospects, I find that the monthly income of the deceased will be ₹9,100/- (6,500 + 40% of 6,500) for the purpose of awarding compensation towards loss of dependency.

Loss of estate:- It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that though an amount of ₹3,00,000/- was claimed, the Tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹10,000/- under the head loss of estate. As per the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants are entitled to ₹15,000/- towards loss of estate and further, 10% enhancement has to be given in every three years after 2017, totalling it to an amount of ₹18,150/-. The tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹10,000/- under the head loss of estate. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹8,150/-

under the afore head.

Loss of love and affection/Loss of consortium:- The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹50,000/- each towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, however, only two legal heirs namely the husband and the child, were present at the time of the death of the injured. Following the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra) the claimants are entitled for an amount of ₹80,000/- (40,000 x 2) under the head loss of consortium. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to adjust the compensation granted towards loss of lo