Dalappa and Others vs Shankar and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—Though this appeal is posted for Further Orders, with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.

This appeal is by the claimants directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 25th February 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 387/2011 on the file of the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, and Member, M.A.C.T.-4 (SCCH-4), Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short). The Tribunal by its impugned Judgment and Award, awarded a sum of Rs. 4,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization on account of the death of the deceased Late Sri Mudduraju D. in the road traffic accident. The claimants have filed this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement, by modifying the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal.

The brief facts of the case on hand are that, the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased. They have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 24,00,000/- against the respondents on account of untimely death of the deceased Muddaraju D. in the road traffic accident that occurred on 11.11.2010 at about 9.00 a.m. when he was proceeding on motor cycle bearing No. KA-02/HK-2982 on the left side of the road near Kuvempu Circle. At that time, driver of the lorry bearing No. KA-41/9019 came at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased from behind. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries and on the way to the Hospital he died.

It is their further case that the deceased was aged about 24 years, working as Hardware Support Engineer, drawing a salary of Rs. 12,500/- per month and the only earning member of the family and hale and healthy prior to the accident. Whatever the amount he earned out of his profession, he used to spend the same to the welfare of the family. On account of untimely death of the deceased, the parents have suffered mental pain and agony and there is total financial loss to the family as he was the only earning member of the family. Taking all these aspects into consideration, they filed claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act against the respondents before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 24,00,000/- with interest.

The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- p.m. and by applying the multiplier as ''15'' taking the age of younger mother of the deceased, awarded Rs. 4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency and Rs. 20,000/- towards conventional heads, in all Rs. 4,70,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants herein have presented this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

It is the submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants at the outset that, the Tribunal has erred in not accepting Ex. P14 - salary certificate showing the deceased drawing salary of Rs. 12,500/- per month which is without any justification and contrary to the evidence on record. Therefore, he submits that the income of the deceased may be re-assessed at Rs. 12,500/- p.m. and deduct 50% towards personal expenses and by applying the appropriate multiplier taking the younger age of the mother, award reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and also conventional heads. Further, in the light of the judgments of Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, the rate of interest may be awarded at 9% to 10% p.a. from the date of petition till realization, by modifying the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal.

As against this, the learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent - insurer inter-alia contended and sought to substantiate stating that the impugned Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence available on record and taking into consideration the age, avocation and year of accident and reasonable compensation is towards loss of dependency and also conventional heads. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

After careful consideration of the submission of the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties 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"?

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellants are none other than parents of the deceased and they have suffered mental pain and agony. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 24 years, working as Hardware Support Engineer in a Private Company, drawing salary of Rs. 12,500/- as per Ex. P14. To substantiate the same they have produced Authorisation letter - Ex. P16, Exs. P17 and P18 - copies of ID. Card, Ex. P19 - copy of appointment letter, Ex. P20 - Attendance Register extract. PW-2 in his cross-examination has stated that the deceased was drawing salary of Rs. 12,500/- per month. The non-production of Bank Statement extract does not take away the legitimate entitlement of compensation and the salary drawn by the deceased as per Ex. P14 may be accepted, for the reason that, in support of the same, they have produced Exs. P15 to P19, which establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was working as Hardware Support Engineer in a Private Limited Company drawing salary of Rs. 12,500/- p.m. Therefore, we accept the salary of the deceased at Rs. 12,500/- per month to meet the ends of justice. Out of which, if we deduct 50% towards his personal expenses i.e. Rs. 6,250/- per month, the remaining net income towards the contribution on the part of the deceased to the family would be Rs. 6,250/- per month. The age of the younger parent, mother is 40 years at the time of accident and the appropriate multiplier applicable is ''15''. Accordingly, we re-determine the compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs. 11,25,000/- (Rs. 6,250/- x 12 x 15) and accordingly, awarded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the light of the judgments of Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, we deem fit to award Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each appellant, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants/claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 12,25,000/- as against Rs. 4,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of Rs. 7,55,000/-.

The accident occurred on 11.11.2010, following the judgments of Apex Court and this Court, we award interest at the rate of 8% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case referred above, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal dated 25th February 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 387/2011 on the file of the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, and Member, M.A.C.T.-4 (SCCH-4), Bangalore is hereby modified awarding Rs. 7,55,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The 2nd respondent - Insurer herein is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with interest at 8% p.a. within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment and award excluding the interest for the delayed period of 438 days from the date of petition till realisation.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,55,000/-, Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No. 2 - mother of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years and renewable for 10 years and she is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

A sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No. 1 - father of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years and renewable for 5 years and he is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2, in equal proportion, immediately on deposit by the 2nd respondent - Insurer.

Draw the award, accordingly.