Appaji and Others vs S. Prathap and Others

N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 22nd October 2012, passed in MVC No. 120/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 3,09,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 8,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the husband and children of the deceased Smt. Sannamma. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 7:30 P.M, on 15-05-2011, when the deceased was proceeding on Bangalore-Mysore Road, near Rudrakshipura Gate, at that time, a motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA-09/W-3218, being ridden by its rider, at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, came and dashed against the deceased pedestrian Sannamma. Due to the impact, she sustained severe injuries to head and other parties of the body and died at the spot.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 55 years and doing milk vending and sandy business, earning Rs. 6,000/- 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 22nd October, 2012. 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. 3,09,000/- 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.

I have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and also the learned counsel appearing for respondent/Insurer, for quite some time.

Learned counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in taking the income of the deceased at only Rs. 3,000/- per month in spite of the fact that the deceased was doing agriculture work, sandy business and also milk vending business. Disbelieving the same, the Tribunal, without any basis, grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 3,000/- per month. The same is liable to be re-assessed. He further submitted that on account of the untimely and unnatural death of deceased, the husband has lost the life partner and children have lost the mother''s care, love and affection, inspection and guidance and considering the number of dependents, 1/4th may be deducted from out of the income of the deceased and adopting the proper multiplier taking the age of the husband of deceased, reasonable compensation be awarded towards loss of dependency.

He further submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and in view of the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in hosts of judgments, the appellants are entitled to higher compensation towards the conventional heads. Therefore, he submitted that, the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is liable to be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency as also conventional heads.

As against this, 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 appearing for the parties, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for my 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 Sannamma. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 55 years and the claimants are none other than the husband and children of deceased. It is stated that the deceased was doing agriculture, milk vending business and also sandy business. But, no documentary evidence is produced in support of the same. But, the Tribunal is also not justified in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 3,000/- per month. The same is liable to be reassessed. In the absence of any documentary evidence, having regard to the number of avocations, age, year of accident, being 2011 and other relevant material, I re-assess the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/-, to meet the ends of justice. From this, I have to deduct 50% towards her living and personal expenses, as the claimants are husband and major children. Accordingly, if 50% (i.e. Rs. 3,000/-) is deducted from Rs. 6,000/- towards her personal and living expenses, the net income would be Rs. 3,000/- per month. Further, it can be seen that, the husband of the deceased was aged about 60 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, for the said age, the proper multiplier applicable is ''9'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case (2009 ACJ 1298) as against ''11'' adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 3,24,000/- (i.e. Rs. 3,000/- x 12 x''9'') as against Rs. 2,64,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. In the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and also the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in M.F.A. No. 7737/2013, disposed of on 25th June 2014 (Smt. Padmavathi and others v. K. Ravichandran and another), I award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection and transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against the compensation awarded by Tribunal.

Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 4,74,000/- as against Rs. 3,09,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/-.

Further, learned counsel appearing for claimants vehemently submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred during the year 2011. 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 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 during the year 2011. 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, I 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 22nd October 2012, passed in MVC No. 120/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,74,000/- as against Rs. 3,09,000/- 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. 1,65,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The Respondent No. 2/Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,65,000/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest, shall be invested in the name of the appellant No. 1/husband of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of five years, renewable for five years, with liberty reserved to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest, shall be invested in the name of the Smt. Lakshmamma/appellant No. 5/daughter of deceased (widow), in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of five years, renewable for five years, with liberty reserved to withdraw the periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 65,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 5, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.