Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation vs Gali Aruna and Others

P.L.N. Sarma, J.—This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ''the Corporation'') questioning the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Nellore, in O.P. No. 493 of 1988 granting a compensation of Rs. 5,72,000/- for the loss of dependency and other items which will be referred to in detail hereinafter.

O.P. No. 493 of 1988 was filed by the claimants u/s 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a total compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- due to the death of one Gali Janardhana Rao. The first claimant is the widow, claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor daughters aged about 11 and 8 years respectively and the fourth claimant is the mother of the deceased Gali Janardhana Rao. It is stated that the fourth claimant gave up her claim in favour of claimant Nos. 1 to 3.

The deceased was working as an Agricultural Development Officer, Divisional Office, Syndicate Bank, Nellore. On 22.9.1988 at 7.00 p.m. at Nippo Factory, Dargamitta, Nellore, the deceased met with an accident. It is stated that while the deceased Gali Janardhana Rao was proceeding on a scooter bearing No. AAN 4888 belonging to the Syndicate Bank near Nippo Factory, the A.P.S.R.T.C. bus bearing No. AAZ 8628 belonging to the Corporation came from behind at high speed and driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the scooter from behind causing grievous injuries to the deceased besides causing extensive damage to the scooter. The deceased was admitted in Government Headquarters Hospital, Nellore and had to be taken to Madras on the advice of the Headquarters Hospital authorities. He was admitted in Guest Hospital, Ponnamalli High Road, Madras. Ultimately, in spite of the treatment given to him, he died at 1.00 a.m. on 27.9.1988 in the Guest Hospital, Madras and the dead body was brought back from Madras in a private ambulance to Nellore. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs. 7,20,000/- for the loss of dependency, Rs. 30,000/- for loss of expectation of life, Rs. 30,000/- for the pain and suffering, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of consortium to the first claimant, Rs. 9,000/- for the funeral expenses, Rs. 1,000/- for loss of wrist watch, Rs. 500/- for damage to clothing, Rs. 2,000 for expenses of attendants, Rs. 500/- for extra nourishment, Rs. 5,000/- for medical expenses and Rs. 2,000/- for the transport charges for transporting the dead body from Madras to Nellore.

The application was resisted by the Corporation mainly on the ground that the accident was not due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the Corporation. The deceased had to apply sudden brakes to the scooter as the driver of a private bus proceeding before him had applied sudden brakes, as a result of which the petitioner dashed against it and fell down and sustained injuries leading to his death. They also contested the quantum of compensation claimed under different heads.

The first claimant examined herself as PW 1, the fourth claimant examined herself as PW 2 and an independent witness was examined as PW 3 and got marked Exhs. A-1 to A-8 on their behalf.

On behalf of the respondent Corporation, RW 1, the driver of the bus bearing No. AAZ 8628 involved in the accident, was examined and Exh. B-1 was marked.

On a consideration of the entire material placed before him, the learned Judge granted a sum of Rs. 5,72,000/- as compensation for the loss of dependency. The Tribunal has also granted a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium to the first claimant, Rs. 5,000/- towards medical expenses incurred and Rs. 2,000/- towards transport charges for the transportation of the deceased from Nellore to Madras and from Madras to Nellore. The Tribunal further granted a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards funeral expenses and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards pain and suffering.

Assailing the order of the Tribunal, the present civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by ''the Corporation''.

Though Mr. P. Gangarami Reddy, learned Counsel for the Corporation, sought to challenge the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing No. AAZ 8628 by its driver, we are of the opinion that there is no substance in the same. The Tribunal accepted the evidence of PW 3, who is an independent eyewitness to the accident, to the effect that the R.T.C.-bus came from behind in a high speed rashly without blowing the horn and dashed against the scooter; as a result the deceased received grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. PW 3 himself gave the report to the police regarding the accident. We have no hesitation to accept the same and the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the R.T.C. bus AAZ 8628.

One of the main objections raised by Mr. P. Gangarami Reddy, counsel for the Corporation, is that multiplicand has not been properly fixed by the Tribunal. Practically, entire amount of the salary indicated by the salary certificate dated 21.10.1988 (Exh. A-6) was taken into consideration and treated as the loss of dependency per month and applying the multiplier of 14, granted a total sum of Rs. 5,40,000/- under the said head. This, according to the learned Counsel, is not sustainable for the reason that the Tribunal is bound to deduct 1/3rd amount from out of the salary towards his personal living expenses, i.e., the amount which the deceased would have spent every month on himself. According to the learned Counsel, this 1/3rd amount has not been deducted while arriving at the multiplicand. The learned Counsel also stated that the proper multiplier to be applied is 14 only and, therefore, the judgment of the Tribunal cannot be sustained.

On the other hand, Mr. K. Niladri Raju, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants, contended that the salary certificate does not indicate the correct emoluments receivable by the deceased. The salary according to the revised scales of pay (Exh. A-8), as are made applicable to the deceased by the date of his death, indicates that the deceased would have been receiving a monthly salary of Rs. 4,258.60 if he were to be alive and that is the amount which will have to be taken into consideration for arriving at the multiplicand. Exh. A-8 is the certificate issued by the Divisional Office, Syndicate Bank, Nellore, dated 27.9.1989. This certificate states that the old scales of pay have been revised and the new scales of pay are also indicated in it. The deceased Gali Janardhana Rao''s pay in new scale of pay is indicated as Rs. 3,420/- (basic) and Rs. 838.60 as dearness allowance. These revised scales of pay are made applicable and have come into effect from 1.11.1987. As on the date of the accident as well as on the date of death of the deceased, he was entitled and eligible for the new scales of pay. Having regard to this certificate, we are of the opinion that the multiplicand will have to be estimated taking into consideration the new scales of pay which he would have got with arrears, but for his death. If the said new scales of pay are taken into consideration, the amount which he would have drawn will come to Rs. 4,258.60 rounded off to Rs. 4,258/- per month. From this amount, we have to necessarily deduct 1/3rd amount towards personal living expenses which the deceased would have spent on himself. When so deducted, the amount of loss of dependency per month comes to Rs. 2,840. Per annum it comes to Rs. 34,080/-. This is the multiplicand arrived at per annum. The deceased as on the date of the accident was aged about 36 years. The relevant multiplier will be 14. If the multiplicand is multiplied by the multiplier of 14, the loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,77,120/-. This is the amount referable to the loss of dependency which the claimants are entitled to. The Tribunal is not right in granting a sum of Rs. 5,40,000/- under the above head. The said sum was arrived at without reference to the deduction towards personal living expenses, i.e., 1/3rd from the salary per month. Therefore, to this extent, the judgment of the lower Tribunal has to be modified and an amount of Rs. 4,77,120/- is fixed as the loss of dependency to the claimants which they are entitled to.

It is next contended by Mr. P. Gangarami Reddy, the counsel appealing for the Corporation that granting of funeral expenses by the Tribunal is not sustainable as it is not permissible under law. In support of the said contention, the learned Counsel relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Rajkamal Transport, Hyderabad v. C. Sugnna Devi 1989 ACJ 730 (AP). The learned Judges in that judgment held as under:

...As there is no statutory provision in India, we feel that no amount can be awarded towards funeral expenses.

Having regard to this judgment, we are of the opinion that granting a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards funeral expenses by the Tribunal is not sustainable and the same is accordingly set aside.

It is then contended by the learned Counsel for the Corporation that the amount of Rs. 10,000/- granted under the head of pain and suffering is also not sustainable having regard to the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Ch. Narasava 1987 ACJ 419 (AP). It is held in the said judgment that there is no question of granting any compensation for pain and suffering of the dependants in fatal accident cases. Having regard to the Full Bench judgment, the order of the Tribunal granting a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards pain and suffering on the part of the dependants is not sustainable and is accordingly set aside.

It is contended by Mr. K. Niladri Raju, counsel appearing for the claimants, that only to the extent of Rs. 10,000/- is granted by the Tribunal as loss of consortium to the first claimant. The learned Counsel drew our attention to a judgment of the Supreme Court in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum Vs. Mrs. Susamma Thomas and others, . In the said judgment, the learned Judges of the Supreme Court held as under:

.. .the usual award for loss of consortium and loss of estate each is the conventional sum of Rs. 15,000/-.

In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, we are of the opinion that the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal for the loss of consortium at Rs. 10,000/- is increased to Rs. 15,000/- and the same is accordingly granted. Similarly, the compensation for the loss of estate is also fixed at Rs. 15,000/- having regard to the judgment of the Supreme Court cited supra. Even though this was not specifically claimed by the claimants, the said amount is allowable under the said head, provided the total compensation awarded by this Court does not exceed the compensation granted by the Tribunal. Therefore, for the reasons mentioned above, we are of the opinion that the respondents-claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,000 towards loss of estate.

Accordingly, the judgment of the Tribunal is modified and the following amounts are granted as compensation to the claimants under different heads:

(1) loss of dependency to the claimants Rs. 4,77,120/- (2) loss of consortium Rs. 15,000/- (3) medical expenses Rs. 5,000/- (4) transport charges from Nellore to Madras and from Madras to Nellore Rs. 2,000/- (5) loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- --------------- Total Rs. 5,14,120/- ---------------

Accordingly, a total amount of Rs. 5,14,120/- (Rupees five lakhs fourteen thousand and one hundred and twenty only) is granted towards compensation under the above heads to the claimants. The rate of interest granted by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed.

In the result, this civil miscellaneous appeal is disposed of with the above modifications. There shall be no order as to costs.