Abeda Khan and Others vs Bhagwant Kaur and Others

Bhawani Singh, C.J.

This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raisen, arising out of Claim Case No. 187 of 1994 dated 28.7.1995.

Claimants are wife, sons and daughter of Mohammad Akbar Khan (deceased), aged 37 years, who died in the accident on 23.7.1992 at 8.30 p.m. when he was returning home on his scooter CIC 5244 and truck No. CII 8717, owned by Bhagwant Kaur, driven by Darshan Singh, rashly and negligently and insured with the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. dashed against him with such a force that the scooter fell in pieces and deceased died at the spot. The body was taken to the District Hospital for autopsy and a case u/s 304A, Indian Penal Code, was registered.

The deceased had passed ITI Fitter Diploma after Higher Secondary Examination. He was running a cottage industry, ''Diamond Fabricates'', apart from working in Some Distillery. He was leading a good life and his children were studying in English medium school. Out of his income, he was sparing Rs. 60,000/- for family expenditure annually. He could live up to 60 years and earn for 20 years. On account of this accident, the wife and the children have suffered. Compensation of Rs. 20,15,000/- has been claimed with interest at the rate of 20 per cent per annum. Owner and the driver of the vehicle have been proceeded ex parte, while the insurance company has opposed the claim stating that the deceased was driving his scooter rashly and negligently resulting in the accident. He did not possess driving licence. Even if it is taken that the truck was involved in the accident, still both the parties were liable for accident. There is violation of insurance policy conditions, therefore, compensation is not payable. The Claims Tribunal has found that accident took place as alleged and the deceased died in this accident. It is also found that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the truck by the driver, but it is not proved that he did not possess driving licence. Similarly, it is not proved that accident took place due to negligence of the deceased. The income of the deceased has been taken to be Rs. 2,500/- per month and his age was 42 years at the time of the accident. Consequently, compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been awarded and allegations of insurance company have not been accepted.

Through this appeal, the appellants are claiming for enhancement of compensation and interest. It is submitted that just and reasonable compensation has not been determined in this case. Longevity of the family has not been appreciated for application of proper multiplier. These submissions are opposed by Mr. S.K. Rao, learned Counsel for the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. submitting that Claims Tribunal has paid just compensation in this case, therefore, further enhancement is not called for.

After giving our careful consideration to the facts of the case, evidence and material before us, we are of the opinion that this appeal deserves to be allowed and claimants be paid higher compensation for reasons we proceed to record.

The deceased was 42 years old at the time of the accident. Claims Tribunal has held that his monthly income was Rs. 2,500/-. Accepting this to be correct then after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, monthly dependency comes to Rs 1666/- and annually Rs 19,992/-. Proper multiplier in this case should be 15. Therefore, the figure comes to Rs. 2,99,880/- after addition of Rs. 2,000/- towards the funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium Rs. 2,500/- towards to loss to estate and Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of expectancy of life, the compensation payable in this case comes to Rs. 3,14,380/-.

Therefore, claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 3,14,380/- with interest at the rate of 10 per cent from the date of application till payment.

Costs on parties.