Dahannu Bhaskar vs Roopdhar

Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J

This is an appeal by the claimants against the award dated 03.10.2017 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, South Bastar District Dantewada C.G. in Claim Case No.80 of 2016, whereby the Claims Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.2,48,000 with interest @ 9% per annum in favour of the claimants fastening liability upon the insurance company.

The brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed a claim for compensation following the death of Joga Bhaskar, who died on 12.08.2016 in a motor vehicle accident. It was contended that on the said date, the deceased was traveling from his residence in Village Gamvada to Village Dhurli and, near the school in Village Gamvada, was struck by a truck bearing registration no. CG-18-H-1549, which was driven in a rash and negligent manner by the driver. As a result, Joga Bhaskar sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The appellant asserted that the accident caused not only the loss of his father but also the loss of annual income. It was further submitted that the offending vehicle was driven by respondent no.1, owned by respondent no.2, and insured with respondent no.3, rendering all respondents jointly liable for compensation. The appellant claimed a total sum of Rs. 12,70,600/- under various heads. In response, respondents no.1 and no.2 denied the allegations, maintaining that the driver exercised due caution and that any liability would fall upon the insurance company. Respondent no.3 denied the claim, contending that the driver did not possess a valid driving license, and the vehicle was operated in violation of fitness and permit conditions, breaching the insurance policy terms, thereby seeking exoneration from liability. The learned Claims Tribunal framed issues, examined the evidence, and after due consideration, partially allowed the appellant’s claim, prompting the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants respectfully submits that the Learned Tribunal has not properly assessed the compensation payable in the present case. It is contended that the income of the deceased has not been correctly computed, and the methodology adopted for assessing the same is neither proper nor in accordance with settled legal principles. In particular, the Tribunal has failed to consider the aspect of future prospects as mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

National Insurance company vs. Pranay Sethi 1. Furthermore, it is submitted that compensation under the conventional heads, including loss of estate, funeral expenses, and loss of consortium, has not been awarded in accordance with the norms laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforementioned judgment. The non-consideration or improper quantification under these heads has led to an unjust and inadequate compensation amount. In view of the above, it is most respectfully prayed that the award passed by the Learned Tribunal may kindly be modified and the compensation amount be enhanced appropriately, in accordance with law and the binding precedents laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company has supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased, which does not warrant any enhancement. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads has also been appropriately determined in accordance with law. Therefore, the appeal preferred by the appellants/claimants is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and carefully perused the material available on record, including, in particular, the impugned judgment passed by the learned Claims Tribunal.

In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza.

Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,48,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case.

Upon perusal of the impugned judgment, this Court finds that the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at ₹3,000/- per month. In the absence of any documentary evidence to establish the exact income of the deceased, the notional income assessed by the Tribunal appears to be reasonable and just. Accordingly, no interference is warranted by this Court on this aspect.

However, with regard to the components of future prospects, loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses, this Court is of the considered view that the compensation awarded under these heads is not in consonance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra). Keeping in view the nature of the occupation of the deceased, the date of the accident, prevailing wage structure at the relevant time, cost of living, and other relevant economic indicators, this Court is inclined to enhance the amount of compensation under the following heads:

Sn.

Heads

Calculation

1.

Income of the Deceased

Rs.36,000/- (Rs.3,000 x 12)

2.

Future Prospect 10%

Rs.3,600/-

3.

Deduction 1/2

Rs.19,800/-

4.

Total

Income

of

the

Rs.19,800/- (Rs.36,000/- +

Deceased

Rs.3,600/- - Rs.19,800/-)

5.

Multiplier of 11

Rs.2,17,800/- (Rs.19,800 x 11)

6.

Loss  of

Consortium

(10%

enhancement in every three

Rs.48,000/-

years)

Loss   of   Estate   (10%

enhancement in every three

Rs,18,000/-

years)

8.

Funeral   Expenses   (10%

enhancement in every three

Rs.18,000/-

years)

Total amount of compensation :

Rs.3,01,800/-

Accordingly, the total compensation is enhanced to Rs.3,01,800/- from Rs.2,48,000/-. Thus, there is an enhancement of Rs.53,800/-, which shall carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal (9% p.a.) from the date of claim petition till realization.

As a result, the appeal is allowed in part. The award dated 03.10.2017 is modified to the extent indicated above. Rest of the terms and conditions of the Tribunal’s award remain intact.

The Registry is directed to intimate the claimants in writing regarding the enhanced amount.

Certified Copy as per rules.