Anjeenamma and Others vs Srinivasa B.C. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 21st November 2014, passed in MVC No. 3511/2013, by the XX Additional Small Cause Judge & Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-22), (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 7,12,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 25,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the wife and two minor children of the deceased Krishna Murthy @ Murthappa @ Murthy. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 7:15 P.M., on 29-04-2013, when the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA-41/8293 on Bangalore-Magadi Main Road, Honnaganahalli, Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Ramanagara District, at that time, a Swift Car bearing Registration No. KA-02/MD-313 came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down and succumbed to the injuries on the spot.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 43 years and working as Milk Vendor and doing Hotel business, earning a sum of Rs. 25,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants have lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance, apart from social, financial and moral support and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.

On account of the death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 21st November, 2014. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 7,12,000/- under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

We have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and also the Insurer, for quite some time and gone through the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal.

Shri. B.S. Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in taking the income of the deceased at only Rs. 6,000/- per month. He submits that the deceased was aged about 43 years and doing milk vending and hotel business, earning a sum of Rs. 25,000/- per month. But, disbelieving the same, the Tribunal, without any basis has assessed the income of the deceased at only Rs. 6,000/- per month. The same is liable to be re-assessed. He further submitted that on account of the untimely and unnatural death of deceased in the road traffic accident, the appellants have suffered mental pain and agony and are in serious financial distress and the children have lost the love and affection and special guidance of their father. Therefore, he submitted that, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency, by adopting proper multiplier and deducting 1/3rd towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased.

He further submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and therefore, the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency as also conventional heads.

Further, he submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred on 29-04-2013. In view of the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, at least 8% to 10% interest per annum may be awarded in the instant case, to meet the ends of justice and the impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly.

As against this, Shri.M. Narayanappa, learned counsel appearing for Insurer vehemently submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal is after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also taking into consideration the age, avocation and also the year of accident etc. Therefore, interference in the same is not called for.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for our consideration in this appeal is,

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?

The undisputed facts of the case are, the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased Krishnamurthy @ Murthappa @ Murthy. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 43 years and doing milk vending and hotel business. It is stated that, out of the two avocations, he was earning a sum of Rs. 25,000/- per month. But, to substantiate the same, the appellants have not produced any credible documentary evidence. The Tribunal, after evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file has assessed the monthly income at Rs. 6,000/-. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed. The accident is of the year 2013 and the deceased was aged about 43 years and doing milk vending and hotel business. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation and also the year of accident, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,500/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Further, as the dependents are three in number, we deduct 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If 1/3rd (i.e. Rs. 2,500/-) is deducted from Rs. 7,500/- towards his personal and living expenses, the net income would be Rs. 5,000/- per month. Further, it is stated that the deceased was aged about 43 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, for the said age, the proper multiplier applicable is ''14'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, as rightly adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 8,40,000/- (i.e. Rs. 5,000/- x 12 x''14'') as against Rs. 6,72,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads also. In the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium as against Rs. 10,000/-; Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate as the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under this head, Rs. 75,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each claimant as against Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 10,65,000/- as against Rs. 7,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 3,53,000/-.

Further, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for claimants, the rate of interest at 6% per annum awarded by Tribunal is on the lower side, as the accident has occurred on 29-04-2013. Therefore, as per the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper to award rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 21st November 2014, passed in MVC No. 3511/2013, by the XX Additional Small Cause Judge & Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-22), is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 10,65,000/- as against Rs. 7,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 3,53,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,53,000/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of first appellant - wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of fifteen years, renewable by fifteen years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the names of second and third appellants - children of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, till they attain the age of 30 years with liberty reserved to appellant No. 1/mother and natural guardian to withdraw the periodical interest for their welfare till they attain the age of 21 years and from 22 years to 30 years, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are entitled to withdraw the interest periodically.

Remaining sum of Rs. 53,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant No. 1, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.

Shri. M. Narayanappa, learned counsel is permitted to file vakalath on behalf of third respondent/Insurer within four weeks from today.