B.K. Bharath and B.K. Vikram vs The Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 3.01.2012 passed in MVC No. 1286/2009 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and MACT-10 at Tumkur. The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,52,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, on account of the death of deceased Sri B.T. Krishnappa in the road traffic accident.

The claimants on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and it requires enhancement, have presented this appeal.

The brief facts of the case on hand are, appellant No. 1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor children of the deceased. They have filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the MV Act claiming compensation on account of untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred on 19.7.2009 at about 12.15 p.m. on account of the injuries sustained due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing registration No. KA01 F 8417. The deceased was aged 47 years and he was the only earning member of the family. He was running Poultry Farm and earning Rs. 30,000/- per month. It is further submitted that due to the untimely death, the claimants have lost love and affection, inspiration, guidance and security. On all these grounds, claim petition was filed, which came up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, in the absence of any credible document, any evidence, to prove the income of the deceased, has taken the income at Rs. 100/- per day or Rs. 3,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses and applying the appropriate multiplier of ''16'', has awarded Rs. 3,12,000/- towards loss of dependency and Rs. 40,000/- conventional heads with 6% interest from the date of petition till its realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed, the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants at the outset that the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the deceased. Non-production of credible document in proof of income does not take away the legitimate entitlement of compensation by the claimants. The deceased was a Proprietor of the Poultry Farm and only earning member of the family. Unfortunately, the wife of the deceased has also died before filing this appeal and the minor children of deceased are now represented through the natural guardian/maternal uncle. This aspect may be taken judicial note and reasonable income may be assessed and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses and by applying the appropriate multiplier of 16, the compensation may be reassessed towards loss of dependency and conventional heads by modifying the judgment and award passed.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-corporation inter alia contended that substantial amount has been awarded by the Tribunal, after due consideration of the oral, documentary and other evidence on record. Therefore, interference is not called for.

After careful consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and after perusal of the impugned judgment and award the point that would arise for consideration is:

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

The occurrence of the accident resulting in death of the deceased in the road traffic accident is not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that the claimants are none other than two minor children. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of accident, we can safely re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice, out of which if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses since the deceased was married i.e., Rs. 1666/-, the net income would be Rs. 3334/- per month. Since the deceased was aged 47 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 13. Accordingly, we re-determine the loss of dependency to Rs. 5,20,104/-.

Accordingly, it is awarded. Further, it is reasonable to award Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads like loss of love and affection, loss of estate and transportation expenses. Thus in all, claimants would be entitled to Rs. 5,65,104/- as against Rs. 3,52,000/- i.e., there would be enhancement of Rs. 2,13,104/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 03.01.2012 passed in MVC No. 1286/2009 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & MACT-10, Tumkur is hereby. modified awarding additional compensation Rs. 2,13,104/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till its realization.

The respondent-Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment.

Out of the compensation amount, Rs. 75,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in any of the nationalized or scheduled bank till they attain the age of 30 years and the natural guardian/maternal uncle is entitled to withdraw the interest periodically till they attain the age of 21 years for their welfare. From 22-30 years appellants 1 and 2 are entitled to withdraw the periodical interest.

Remaining Rs. 63,104/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant No. 1, immediately after deposit by the respondent-Corporation.

Draw the award, accordingly.