Krishna Bahadur Rai vs K.G.Jayarajan

T.R.Ravi, J

The petitioners are the legal representatives of deceased Abin Rai who died in a motor accident on 15.6.2009. The claim for compensation preferred before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pala, was allowed by judgment dated 14.1.2013 granting a compensation of Rs.2,22,300/- with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of petition i.e., 21.6.2010 till the date of deposit along with proportionate cost. The appellants have approached this Court contending that the Tribunal has gone wrong in calculating the compensation payable.

Heard Sri.S.Ananthakrishnan on behalf of the appellants and Smt. Asha Chacko on behalf of the respondents.

The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that, while considering a claim under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Tribunal had to follow the Second Schedule in the Act whereby the compensation payable is fixed. Admittedly, the deceased was aged 26 years at the time of the accident. The Tribunal held that the notional income is fixed at Rs.3,300/- per month and that since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% has to be reduced towards amounts expended for personal and living expenses of the deceased. Applying the multiplier '11' on the basis of the age of the parents, the Tribunal arrived at a compensation of Rs.2,17,800/- towards 'the loss of dependency'.

As per Section 163A, a structured formula has been enacted for calculating compensation in the case of death or permanent disablement as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. The manner in which the Second Schedule has to be understood has been laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in the decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Chacko reported in 2011(3) KLT 693. In paragraph 34, the Division Bench set out the conclusions. Paragraph 34(iv) reads thus;

"iv) For ascertaining the quantum of compensation payable in the case of death, the amount given in "rupees in thousands" under the 13 vertical columns against the relevant horizontal column alone, subject to the note, has to be taken into consideration. The multiplier-multiplicand method would be irrelevant and cannot be pressed into service while ascertaining compensation payable in the case of death under Section 163A."

Applying the Second Schedule for the notional annual income fixed above Rs.36,000/-, the amounts payable in cases where the deceased is above 25 years and not exceeding 30 years, is Rs.6,80,000/-. As per the Note under the schedule, the amount of compensation has to be reduced by 1/3rd in consideration of the expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining himself, had he been alive. Applying the above formula to the facts of this case, the compensation payable would be Rs.6,80,000 x 2/3, which comes to Rs.4,53,333.33/- rounded to Rs.4,53,333/-. The appellants are also entitled to Rs.2,000/- towards 'funeral expenses' and Rs.2,500/- towards 'loss of estate' and total compensation payable would be thus Rs.4,57,833/-.

The appeal is allowed. The award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pala, in O.P.(MV)No.474/2010 is modified by awarding a sum of Rs.4,57,833/- as compensation with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition i.e., 21.6.2010 till the date of deposit along with proportionate cost. The second respondent shall deposit the above amount with interest as ordered above within 60 days from the date of this judgment, after deducting the amounts already paid under the award granted by the Tribunal. The additional compensation allowed by this Court will be allotted equally to all the appellants.

The appeal is allowed as above.

All pending interlocutory applications are closed.