AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J.—Both the appeals arise out of the award, dated 20th October, 2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla, H.P. in Claim Petition bearing No. 21-S/2 of 2010, titled Kanta and others vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation, whereby and whereunder, compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,05,600/- was awarded in favour of the claimants, (hereinafter referred to as the impugned award).
Facts of the case, in brief, are that claimants Kanta and others, being the victims of vehicular accident, invoked the jurisdiction of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla, by the medium of Claim Petition No. 21-S/2 of 2010, for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 30.00 lacs, as per the break-ups given in the Claim Petition. It was alleged that deceased Suresh Kumar was traveling in the bus bearing No. HP-07-0747 on 16.11.2009, and due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver, the bus rolled down the highway at Rukhltu resulting in fatal injuries to Suresh Kumar, who later on succumbed to the same.
Claim Petition was resisted by the respondent-Himachal Road Transport Corporation by filing reply.
On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Tribunal:
Whether Suresh Kumar died due to the rash and negligent driving of bus No. HP-07-0747 by its driver? OPP
If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to and from whom? OPP
Whether the petition is not maintainable? OPR
Relief.
In order to prove their claim, the claimants examined PW-1 Vashal Shangta, PW-2 Rajinder Sharma, PW-3 Kanta Devi (claimant), PW-4 Dr. Yashpal, PW-5 Kirpa Ram, PW-6 Sarita Verma, PW-7 Ram Bahadur and PW-8 Rajesh Dipta, while respondent-Corporation examined Hem Raj as RW-1. The claimants have also placed on record documents Exts. PW-1/A, PW-1/B, PW-1/C, PW-1/D, PW-1/E, PW-3/A, PW-3/B, PW-3/C, PW-3/D, PW-3/E, PW-3/F, PW-3/G-1 to G-8, PW-4/A, PW-5/A, PW-7/A and PW-8/A, i.e. Copies of registration number of contractor-ship, salary certificate, assessment, balance sheet, profit and loss, school leaving certificate, FIR, parivar register, death certificate, legal heirs certificate, ration card, jamabandies, postmortem report and affidavits, respectively.
The Tribunal, after scanning the evidence, awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,05,600/- in favour of the claimants and against the respondent-Corporation, and the compensation amount was to carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum in case the respondent-Corporation failed to deposit the amount within a period of two months from the date of the award.
The Himachal Road Transport Corporation, feeling aggrieved, questioned the impugned award by the medium of FAO No. 421 of 2011, and the claimants also challenged the impugned award on the ground of adequacy of compensation by way of FAO No. 479 of 2011.
There is no dispute about the accident and in both the appeals, findings recorded by the Tribunal under issue No. 1 have not been challenged. However, I have gone through the record. The claimants have proved by leading evidence that the accident was the outcome of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Corporation, who was driving the offending bus bearing registration No. HP-07-0747 rashly and negligently and caused the accident, in which Suresh Kumar sustained injuries and succumbed to the same. Thus, the findings recorded under issue No. 1 are liable to be upheld.
Before Issue No. 2 is dealt with, I deem it proper to take up issue No. 3 first. The onus to prove this issue was on the Corporation. However, the Corporation has not led any evidence to prove the said issue. The claim petition is the outcome of the vehicular accident and the claimants have rightly invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal by the medium of the claim petition. Thus, issue No. 3 is decided against the owner-Corporation and in favour of the claimants and the findings recorded by the Tribunal under this issue are upheld.
Coming to issue No. 2, the claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month while working as Munshi and was also having income from other sources. The Tribunal after scanning the oral as well as documentary evidence held that the deceased was earning Rs. 5,500/- per month from all sources and after deducting meager amount of Rs. 600/-, which is less than 10% of the total income of the deceased, towards his personal expenses, the dependency of the claimants was assessed at as Rs. 4900/- per month. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , which decision was upheld by the larger Bench of the Apex Court in Reshma Kumari and Others Vs. Madan Mohan and Another, , it is held that the Tribunal has correctly made the deductions and rightly assessed the dependency of the claimants. However, the Tribunal has fallen in error in applying the multiplier of 12. Keeping in view of the age of the deceased i.e. 42 years, the multiplier of 15 was applicable, but as per the dictum of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case supra, multiplier of 13 is just and appropriate, instead of 12, as applied by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal has also fallen in error in awarding interest at the rate of 9% only in case the respondent-Corporation did not deposit the amount of compensation within a period of two months from the date of the award, which is legally incorrect. In terms of Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants are entitled for interest from the date of presentation of the Claim Petition. Therefore, the claimants are held entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition i.e. 25th March, 2010 till the amount was deposited before this Court i.e. 20th January, 2012.
In view of the above discussion, the claimants are held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 4900 x 13 x 12 = Rs. 7,64,400/-. The Tribunal has also not awarded any compensation under the heads ''funeral expenses'', ''loss of estate'' and ''loss of consortium''. Therefore, Rs. 2,000/-, Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 2,500/- (total Rs. 9,500/-) are awarded under the said heads, respectively. Thus, in all, the claimants are held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,64,400 + Rs. 9,500/- = Rs. 7,73,900/-. Claimants have already been paid Rs. 10,000/- as interim compensation. Therefore, the claimants are held entitled to the sum of Rs. 7,73,900/- Rs. 10,000/- = Rs. 7,63,900/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% from the date of the Claim Petition till the deposit of the same. Accordingly, the findings under issue No. 2 are modified and compensation is enhanced. The enhanced amount be deposited by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation within a period of six weeks from today. The Registry is directed to release the awarded amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the impugned award.
In view of the above discussion, the appeal filed by the HRTC, being FAO No. 421 of 2011, is dismissed and the appeal filed by the claimants, being FAO No. 479 of 2011, is partly allowed, as indicated above. A copy of this judgment be placed on the file of FAO No. 479 of 2011.