ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD vs SMT THAYAMMA

The APSRTC has filed this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and award dated 01-12-2011 made in MVC No.2594/2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short).

The respondents 1 to 4 herein filed a claim petition contending that the husband of the first claimant, father of claimants 2 to 4 deceased N.Rudraiah while proceeding in his Super XL TVS vehicle towards B.Kothekote on the left side of the road along with the pillion rider Nagappa at about 2.00 p.m., near Emparlapalli, an APSRTC bus bearing Registration No.AP-10/Z-5164 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came in a high speed and dashed against the Super XL of the deceased. Due to that, the rider as well as the pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Rider of the Super XL sustained fatal injuries to vital parts of the body and died on the spot. The wife and children have filed the claim petition contending that the deceased was working as a Forest Guard, getting salary of Rs.8,416/- p.m. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the APSRTC bus, the accident occurred and the deceased died on the spot. Due to the death of the deceased, the family has lost the bread earner and hence sought for compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-.

The respondent-Corporation defended the case by filing written statement and contended that due to the negligence on the part of rider of the Super XL vehicle, the accident had occurred and that the compensation claimed is exorbitant. Hence sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

The Tribunal after trial held that the accident occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the APSRTC bus, the claimants are dependants of the deceased and they are entitled for compensation.

It is relevant to note here that on an earlier occasion, the Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.5,75,000/- to the claimants by its judgment and award dated 24-07-2007. The said judgment and award was questioned by the fifth respondent herein, who claims to be the legally wedded wife of the deceased, the claimants also preferred MFA Crossobjections before this Court. Both the appeal and cross objections were clubbed together and this Court, by its judgment dated 08-07-2011 remanded the matter to the Tribunal with a direction to consider the salary slip of the deceased and also the additional evidence if any and pass fresh orders. After the remand, the salary certificate of the deceased was produced at Ex.P7 which shows that the deceased was getting salary of Rs.8,416/- p.m. The Tribunal taking into consideration the income of the deceased as Rs.8,416/-, applying the multiplier 13 considering the age of the deceased as 50 years as on the date of death, awarded a sum of Rs.13,12,896/- towards loss of dependency and a sum of Rs.37,000/- towards conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.13,49,896/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The liability was fastened on the APSRTC to compensate the claimants. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the appellantCorporation has preferred this appeal.

Sri.D.Vijayakumar, learned counsel appearing for appellant-APSRTC contended that the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is contrary to law. As per the salary certificate, the deceased was getting salary of Rs.8,416/- p.m., while awarding compensation, the Tribunal ought to have deducted some portion of his salary towards his personal expenditure. Further, at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 56 years, applying the multiplier 13 is also contrary to law and hence sought for modification of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

On the other hand, Sri.G.M.Ananda, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Sri.N.Gopalakirshna, learned counsel for Respondent No.5 argued in support of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and contended that the quantum of compensation awarded is just and fair compensation and hence sought for dismissal of the appeal.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award, oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties.

The only dispute in this appeal to be decided is with regard to quantum of compensation.

The salary certificate of the deceased produced as Ex.P7 by the claimants clearly discloses that deceased N.Rudraiah was getting salary of Rs.8,416/- p.m., he was working as a Forest Guard. At the time of accident, he was aged about 56 years. As per the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS v/s DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, the appropriate multiplier to be adopted is 9. Hence, the Tribunal adopting the multiplier 13 is contrary to law. There is some substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. The income of the deceased was Rs.8,416/- p.m., deducting Rs.150/- towards professional tax, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.8,266/-. Since there are 4 dependants, 1/4th has to be deducted towards his personal expenditure. Hence, the income of the deceased works out to Rs.6,200/- p.m., applying the multiplier 9, the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.6,69,600/- towards loss of dependency as against Rs.13,12,896/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the wife has lost the company of her husband, hence she is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium. Further the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards conventional heads. In all, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.7,64,600/- which is rounded off to Rs.7,65,000/- as against Rs.13,49,898/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER

The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 01-12-2011 made in MVC No.2594/2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur is modified. The claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.7,65,000/- as against Rs.13,49,896/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

The amount in deposit is directed to be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur for disbursement.

The excess amount if any, be refunded to the appellant.