C. Sharadamma and Others vs G. Shivashankar and Others

N.K. Patil, J.

This appeal is by the claimants directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 9th October 2012 passed in M.V.C. No. 186/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Hinyur (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short). The Tribunal by its impugned common Judgment and Award, awarded a sum of Rs. 4,73,128/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation on account of the death of the deceased late Sri. T. Ramamurthy in the road traffic accident. The claimants have filed this appeal on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.

The brief facts of the case of the claimants on hand are that, the appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are minor children and appellant No. 5 is the mother of the deceased. They have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the respondents on account of untimely death of the deceased T. Ramamurthy in the road traffic accident that occurred on 25.05.2011 at about 9.15 p.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of the Bus bearing Registration No. KA-19/AB-5555 driven by its Driver. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Further, it is contended that the deceased T. Ramamurthy was aged about 40 years and an Agriculturist by profession; he was the only bread earner of the family. The entire family was depending upon the income of the deceased; and hale and healthy prior to the accident. The appellant No. 1 - wife has lost her companion/husband at her young age, children have lost love and affection, inspiration and guidance of their father, mother has lost her son and suffered mental pain and agony and she has been deprived to see the bright future of the son. Further, it is the case of the appellants that the deceased was getting income of more than Rs. 10,000/- per month as progressive agriculturist. Taking all these aspects into consideration, they filed claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act before the Tribunal, claiming compensation against the respondents.

The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn after due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and the material available on record, allowed the claim petition in part by awarding compensation of Rs. 4,73,128/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal, the appellants herein felt necessitated to present this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

The submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants Sri. Madhukar Nadig at the outset is that, the Tribunal has committed miscarriage of justice in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 3,500/- p.m. as the deceased was an agriculturist, aged about 40 years and the only bread earning member of the family and owned agricultural land. Therefore, the income of the deceased may be re-assessed reasonably and award compensation towards loss of dependency. It is the further submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants that the accident occurred on 25.05.2011, the dependents are 5 in number - wife, three minor children and mother. Therefore, 1/4th of the income may be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Further, he submitted that, what is awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and in the light of the catena of judgments of Apex Court and this Court, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards conventional heads and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side and the same may be modified to 9% p.a. in the light of the catena of decisions of Apex Court and this Court by modifying the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

Per contra, the learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent - insurer Sri. D. Vijaya Kumar inter-alia contended and sought to substantiate stating that the impugned Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due consideration of entire oral and documentary evidence available on record and the Tribunal has rightly awarded reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and conventional heads and interference by this Court is not called for.

After careful consideration of the submissions of learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent - insurer and after perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:

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

It is an undisputed fact that the deceased was aged about 40 years, agriculturist and he met with an accident on 25.05.2011, sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Claimants are five in number i.e. wife, three minor children and mother of the deceased which is also not in dispute. They have filed claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act claiming compensation against the respondents, contending that on account of untimely death of the deceased, the social and economic condition of the family is affected. Therefore, taking the age, avocation and year of accident, we can safely re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- p.m. to meet the ends of justice and out of which 1/4th is deducted towards personal expenses i.e. a sum of Rs. 1,500/- as the claimants are five in number, the contribution of the deceased to the family would be Rs. 4,500/-. The deceased was aged about 40 years and the appropriate multiplier applicable is ''15''. Accordingly, we deem fit to re-determine the compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs. 8,10,000/- (i.e. Rs. 4,500/- x 12 x 15) and accordingly awarded.

The wife has lost her companion/husband at her young age of just 29 years, children have lost love and affection, inspiration and guidance of their father, mother has suffered mental agony and deprived to see the bright future of her son, in the light of the catena of judgments of Apex Court and this Court, we deem fit to award Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 1,00,000/-towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- each, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 10,60,000/- as against Rs. 4,73,128/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of Rs. 5,86,872/-. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants that the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6% p.a. is on the lower side, in the light of the catena of judgments of Apex Court and this Court, we deem fit to award interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization.

Having regard to the facts referred above, the instant appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal dated 9th October 2012 in M.V.C. No. 186/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hiriyur is hereby modified awarding Rs. 10,60,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till payment.

The 2nd respondent - Insurer herein is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount of Rs. 5,86,872/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment and award.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,86,872/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No. 1 - wife of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, for a period of 15 years and renewable for another 10 years and she is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 - minor children of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, for a period of 30 years and appellant No. 1 - mother of the appellant Nos. 2 to 4 is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it for the welfare of the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 till they attain the age of 22 years. From 23 to 30 years, the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No. 5 -mother of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, for a period of 5 years and renewable for another 5 years and she is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued.

Remaining amount of Rs. 86,872/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 5 in equal proportion, immediately on deposit by the 2nd respondent -Insurer.

Draw the award, accordingly.