Govind Baburao Bhonsle vs Jaiwant Surya Mopkar

A.R. Joshi, J.—Heard rival arguments on this First Appeal preferred by original respondents no. 1 & 2, i.e. the owner and driver of the offending motor vehicle.

In the present appeal, the judgment and award passed in Claim Petition No. 44/2007 is challenged. Initial Claim Petition was for Rs. 10.00 lakhs. It was partly allowed and present appellants, both the respondents, were jointly and severally held liable to pay the compensation of Rs. 5,65,000/- to the claimants, that is the parents and brother of the victim. The amount was also to carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the petition till realisation. Costs of the petition were also awarded.

It is a factual position that the deceased by name Surya was aged about 29 years and was working in Government office in electrical department. His salary was Rs. 6286/- per month and it is an admitted position as substantiated by way of salary certificate. The age of the victim is also substantiated by the documents filed by the witnesses.

The accident occurred at about 8.40 a.m. on 24/08/2006 when both the vehicles were coming from opposite direction. Admittedly, respondent no. 2 was driving the Indica car which was owned by respondent no. 1. Rash and fast driving of the Indica car has been substantiated by the evidence led before the Court by way of police constable, who drew the panchanama and the sketch produced on record and by the factual position that the Indica car was found on the spot in upside down condition and was completely on the wrong side of the road. In the said accident there were three other motorcycles involved, which were lying on the road. One of the motorcycles was being driven by the victim Surya. Apparently he died on the spot. The accidental death has not been disputed and it has been established. Though respondent no. 1 entered into defence by examining himself nothing could be brought on record in order to substantiate the defence that the victim himself was driving the two wheeler vehicle in rash and negligent manner. It is significant to note that the victim was riding on two wheeler whereas the impact is by way of the dash given by the Tata Indica car which is a four wheeler. Moreover, it is still significant to note that the accident occurred when the motor car had left its track and went towards wrong side of the road. This is substantiated by the sketch drawn during spot panchanama and the wheel marks found on the road, which are to the extent of about 18 metres. This indicates rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent no. 1 and in the opinion of this Court, it has been rightly held so by the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mapusa, Goa.

Now coming to the quantum of claim awarded, the ages of the claimants no. 1 & 2, i.e. the parents of the deceased were considered. They were below 55 years, but were definitely dependent on the earnings of the deceased. Claimant no. 3 is the brother of the deceased and he was aged about 23 years at the time of the accident. Apparently, he was also dependent, but his dependency could not be extended beyond few years considering his age. However, so far as dependency of claimants no. 1 & 2 is concerned, considering their ages the said dependency definitely could be more than 10 years. This aspect has been dealt with by the trial Court, and multiplier of 11 years has been taken which in the pinion of this Court is much on the conservative side considering the age of the deceased. However, still considering that there is no claim for enhancement of the compensation and considering the uncertainties in the life of the claimants also, in the opinion of this Court, there may not be any intervention in the appellate jurisdiction so far as that quantum is concerned. Still it must be mentioned that the amount of compensation is definitely on the conservative side.

Considering the above factual position and the reasoning given by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mapusa, Goa there is nothing to entertain the present appeal in favour of the appellants so as to alter the final award. As such, the present appeal stands dismissed and accordingly disposed of.

Some part of the awarded amount has been reportedly deposited with this Court by the appellants. The said amount along with interest accrued, if any, be allowed to be withdrawn by the present respondents, original claimants in terms of the original award. The balance amount shall be paid by the appellants as per the earlier award or on the failure, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate course of action.