JITHAMOL Vs. K.R. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the claimants in O.P.(M.V.) No. 2314/2009 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. The 1st appellant is the wife of one Renjith, who passed away in a road traffic accident, 2nd and 3rd appellants are his children and the 4th appellant is his mother. The deceased Renjith was a renowned Kathakali Artist. On 26.01.2009 at 5.15 AM, while Renjith was travelling in a bus bearing No. KA/05- AF/100, from Bangalore to Trivandrum after staging a drama at Bangalore, the said bus overturned at Dharmapuri, the passengers sustained severe injuries, and subsequently Renjith succumbed to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. The respondents 1 and 2 are the owner and insurer of the said vehicle. The factum of the accident and insurance coverage were admitted by the contesting respondents. After finding that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 7,92,500/- as compensation to the appellants for the death of Renjith. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, this appeal is filed on various grounds.

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too low and inadequate. The deceased was a renowned Kathakali artist and a stage actor. He was a member of a famous drama troop. The accident occurred while the drama troop was returning after staging a drama by name 'Chayamukhi', wherein the famous actor Bharath Mohanlal was the hero. The Tribunal had fixed only Rs. 5,000/- as notional income, whereas he was drawing an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as salary, while he was employed in Kerala Kathakali Centre from the year 2006 to January, 2009. Along with the appeal, the appellants filed I.A.No.1372/2012 with certain documents, and the counsel prayed for admitting those documents also in evidence.

(3.) We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel. Going by the award, it could be seen that though the appellants contended that the deceased was a renowned artist and his glory was so high that he was acting the character of 'Hidumbi' in the drama by name 'Chayamukhi' along with Mohanlal, no evidence either oral or documentary has been produced in evidence to prove the above contention. Moreover, no oral evidence has been adduced by the claimants. The appellants claimed that he was employed in a famous Kathakali troop by name Kerala Kathakali Centre from 2006 to 2009; but no evidence was adduced to prove that claim also. In the absence of evidence, the Tribunal fixed Rs. 5,000/- as the notional income of the deceased. We find nothing wrong in fixing the income so, in the absence of sufficient proof and the same is just and reasonable.