NASEEMA BEEVI Vs. AMEER SHAHUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 100 of 2004 on the files of the SubJudge, Nedumangad is the appellant and the respondents were the defendants therein. The suit was filed claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000.00 together with future interest at the rate of 18 % p.a from the defendants and their assets. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:-

(2.) The plaintiff is the mother of the deceased Nisamol who passed away on 2/6/2001 in New Delhi at the residences of defendants 1 and 2. She is residing in Lekshamveedu colony having no means of her own other than 4 cents of property and has small building thereon. The plaintiff is a chronic heart patient suffering from other ailments and cannot work to earn her livelihood. She has a son who is blind and invalid. The deceased Nisamol was the only earning member of the family. The 1st defendant was employed in New Delhi along with his wife, the 2nd defendant. The 3rd defendant is the father of the 1st defendant, and the 4th defendant is the relative of the 3rd defendant. Defendants 3 and 4, having close acquaintance with the plaintiff and made a proposal to the plaintiff to take her daughter Nisamol to Delhi to look after the kids of defendants 1 and 2. As plaintiff and her children were in extreme poverty, she was forced to accept the proposal of the 3rd & 4th defendant. Accordingly, Nisamol was taken to Delhi on 5/12/2000.

(3.) On 2/6/2001, the 4th defendant informed the plaintiff that her daughter was ill and admitted to a hospital in Delhi. The plaintiff was taken to Delhi by Air on that day itself, along with her uncle. The 1st defendant informed the plaintiff that Nisamol died due to blood cancer. The body of Nisamol was taken back to the native place and buried at the graveyard of Mangalappally Jama Ath, Mathira. The plaintiff suspected that the death of the daughter was due to the ill treatment of defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiff was shattered by the unnatural death of her only daughter, the only earning member of the family. The plaintiff has lost all her amenities, ambition, happiness, peace of mind, and everything in her life. The defendants are jointly and severally liable for putting the plaintiff in misery. Though a notice was issued to the defendants to pay compensation, they were not amenable, so the suit was filed.