JUDGMENT : SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J. [MACA Nos. 843/2018, C.O. 104/2024] 1. This appeal is filed by the 3rd respondent insurance company in O.P.(MV) No.67 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. The respondents herein are the claimants before the Tribunal. The cross objection No.104 of 2024 is filed by the cross objectors/claimants. 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows: On 21.11.2011, at 8.45 p.m., while the deceased was walking through the side of the road, an innova car bearing registration No.KL-01-AN-9441 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit the deceased and as a result, the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants approached the Tribunal claiming a total compensation of ? 14,33,000/-. 3. Though notice was served on the respondents, the first and second respondents, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle respectively, remained absent and were set ex parte before the Tribunal. The third respondent - insurer filed a written statement admitting the insurance policy, disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. Exts.A1 to A15 and Ext.B1 were marked before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the second respondent and awarded a sum of ? 15,43,800/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs. Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded, the 3 rd respondent - insurance company has come up in appeal and dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation award, the claimants/cross objectors have filed cross objection. 4. Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellant/insurance company and the learned counsel for the cross objectors/claimants. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company as well as the the learned counsel for the cross objectors/claimants mainly challenged the quantum of compensation under the following heads: I. Notional income : The learned counsel for the cross-objectors/claimants submitted that the deceased was an ex-Gulf returnee and was engaged in the vehicle business at the relevant time of accident. However, the Tribunal had fixed the income as ? 8,000/-. Even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. However, the Tribunal had fixed the income as ? 8,000/-. Even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. 2011 (13) SCC 236 , the income of a coolie for an accident which occurred in 2011, is fixed at ? 8,000/-. However, the Tribunal while passing the award has considered Ext.A14 original driving licence which was issued by the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Ministry of Qatar, as well as the licence issued by the Indian Government and accordingly, fixed the income of the deceased. The learned counsel for the cross objectors/claimants submitted that the deceased was not a coolie but he was a businessman by profession. Considering the facts of this case, in order to award a just and reasonable compensation, I find it appropriate to re-fix the monthly income at 10,000/-. II. Loss of dependency The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal had added 30% future prospects towards the monthly income. Since the deceased was aged 49 years at the time of accident and was self employed, following the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC), 25% of the future prospects is to be added towards the monthly income now fixed and the income would be ? 12,500/- (10,000 x 25% + 10,000) for awarding compensation under the head, loss of dependency. Since there are six legal heirs for the deceased, the deduction towards his personal and living expenses is 1/4th and the multiplier to be adopted is “13”. Hence, following the apex court judgements in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2010 (2) KLT 802 (SC) the total compensation payable under the afore head is recalculated as thus: ? 14,62,500/- (12,500 x x 12 x 13 x 3/4). The Tribunal had granted an amount of ? 12,16,800/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ? 2,45,700/- (Rupees Two Lakh Forty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Only) under the afore head. III. Funeral expenses and loss of estate - The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company submitted that under the conventional heads such as funeral expenses and loss of estate, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of ? 25,000 each, whereas the claimants/cross objectors are entitled only for ? 15,000/- each. III. Funeral expenses and loss of estate - The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company submitted that under the conventional heads such as funeral expenses and loss of estate, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of ? 25,000 each, whereas the claimants/cross objectors are entitled only for ? 15,000/- each. Going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), I find that the appellants are entitled for an amount of ? 15,000/- each under the conventional heads, funeral expenses and loss of estate. Accordingly, there will be a deduction of ? 10,000/- each under the afore two heads, funeral expenses and loss of estate respectively. I V . Loss of consortium/loss of love and affection The learned counsel for the cross objectors/claimants submitted that the Tribunal had awarded only an amount of ? 1,00,000/- towards the head loss of consortium. However, the legal heirs were six in number at the time of death of the injured, the claimants/cross objectors are entitled for an amount of ? 2,40,000/- under the head loss of consortium (40,000 x 6). The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal had awarded an amount of ? 1,50,000/- under the head loss of love and affection, which is impermissible and runs against the mandate in Pranay Sethi (supra). In New India Assurance Company v. Somwati and others, 2020 (5) KLT OnLine 1198 (SC), it has been held that once compensation is awarded under the head loss of consortium, no amount shall be awarded under the head loss of love and affection, as it would amount to duplication of compensation. Accordingly, I delete an amount of ? 1,50,000/- granted under the head loss of love and affection and I award an additional amount of ? 1,40,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Thousand Only) under the head loss of consortium. 6. Though the appellant – insurance company or cross objectors - claimants challenged the enhancement of compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. Since the appeal is of the year 2018, I find it reasonable to award interest @ 8% per annum for the enhanced compensation. 7. Since the appeal is of the year 2018, I find it reasonable to award interest @ 8% per annum for the enhanced compensation. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified as follows: S. No. Head of Claim Amount claimed (in Rs.) Amount awarded by the tribunal (in Rs.) Amount modi?ed in appeal (in Rs.) Total compensation 1 Medical and miscellaneous expenses 15,000 - - - 2 Transportation expenses 2,000 10,000 (not modi?ed) 10,000 3 Damage to clothing etc 1,000 2,000 (not modi?ed) 2,000 4 Pain and su?ering 15,000 15,000 (not modi?ed) 15,000 5 Loss of dependency income 12,80,000 12,16,800 2,45,700 14,62,500 6 Loss of consortium 30,000 1,00,000 1,40,000 2,40,000 7 Loss of love and a?ection 30,000 1,50,000 (-1,50,000) Deleted 8 Loss of estate 1,000 25,000 (-10,000) 15,000 9 Funeral expenses 50,000 25,000 (-10,000) 15,000 Total (claim limited to) 14,33,000 15,43,800 2,15,700 17,59,500 Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the claimants/cross objectors are awarded an additional compensation of ? 2,15,700/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifteen Thousand Seven Hundred Only) over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate cost. The appellant - insurer shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The claimants/cross objectors shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR Card and Bank details before the respondent insurer within a period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount shall be disbursed to the cross objectors/claimants at the earliest, in accordance with law. However, the claimants/cross objectors will not be entitled for interest for a period of delay of 1532 days in filing the cross objection.