KADEEJA Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimants in O.P.(M.V).No.970/2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, are the appellants herein. The appellants are the brothers and sisters of deceased Jamal, who died in a motor vehicle accident, caused on account of the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the 2nd respondent, owned by the first respondent corporation. The claim was filed by the appellants under Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the vehicle by the 2nd respondent. Though, the claim was filed originally under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, subsequently, the same was converted into a claim under 163 A of the Act. The tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as 2,000/- per month, and finding that the appellants are not the dependants of the deceased, deducted 2/3rd from the income of the deceased and awarded a total compensation of 1,08,500/- as follows: <p><table class = tablestyle width="51%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="font-family:Verdana"> <tr> <td><div align="center"><strong>Sl. No.</strong></div></td> <td><div align="center"><strong>Head of claim</strong></div></td> <td><div align="center"><strong>Amount awarded</strong></div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">1</div></td> <td>Loss of dependency</td> <td><div align="center">104000</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">2</div></td> <td>Funeral expenses</td> <td><div align="center">2000</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">3</div></td> <td>Loss of estate</td> <td><div align="center">2500</div></td> </tr> </table>

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The counsel for the appellants submitted that, in the case of a claim under Section 163 A of the Act, the tribunal was not expected to calculate the compensation payable on the basis of the dependency of the claimants. Once the death is proved to be due to the user of the vehicle, then the tribunal need only consider the age of the deceased and the income of the deceased and apply the 2nd schedule provided under the Act for the purpose of calculating the compensation, from which 1/3rd has to be deducted for the personal expenses of the deceased and add the conventional amount of 2,000/- under the head funeral expenses and 2,500/- under the head loss of estate are to be added. So, the method of calculation adopted by the tribunal was erroneous and the appellants are entitled to get compensation as provided under the 2nd schedule.