Dahna Bai Rajhans (Smt.) and Others vs Ayyub Ali @ Baban and Others

Rajiv Gupta, C.J.—This is claimants'' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short ''the Tribunal'') vide award dated 03.07.2008, passed in Claim Case No.81/2007. As against the compensation of Rs. 19,00,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and major sons of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans, by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 08.03.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,04,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 08.03.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No.CG-04 E/0614; as the above offending vehicle Minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the insurance company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality.

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month and Rs. 36,000/- per annum. By deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 18,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 18,000/- with the multiplier of 5, the compensation was worked out to Rs.90,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs. 14,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,04,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 1,04,500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants'' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 3,000/-per month only; in deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 5; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,04,500/- only.

Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Minibus, on the other hand, contended that as deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans was aged about 60 years on the date of the accident, the compensation of Rs. 1,04,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

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 we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs. 1,04,500/-awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans used to earn Rs. 150-200/- per day as Carpenter, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the above extent. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum.

The deduction of 50% of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal towards his personal expenses, in the particular facts of the present case, also cannot be found fault with as Claimants No.2 and 3 i.e. Gaurango Rajhans and Parmanand Rajhans are major sons of the deceased, who were having their own independent income and as such, were not dependent on the deceased at all.

Nevertheless, the multiplier of 5 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration.

The Tribunal found that deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans was aged about 60 years on the date of the accident as admitted by his son, AW 1 Parmanand. The dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, prescribes multiplier of 9 for the age group between 56-60 years. In our opinion, the Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 9.

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 18,000/- with the multiplier of 9, the compensation works out to Rs. 1,62,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs. 5,000/-for loss of estate; and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1,77,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans in the motor accident.

The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs. 7,500/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.72,500/-.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,04,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,77,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 7,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 72,500/-.

Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months'' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 80,000/- (Rs. 72,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 7,500/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 72,500/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs.