J. Shantha and Others vs N.S. Lalitha and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 22nd May 2014, passed in MVC No. 583/2013, by the Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-8, Thirthahalli, Shivamogga, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 8,47,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 33,35,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the wife, two minor children and parents of the deceased K.E. Nagaraja. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 11:15 P.M., on 30-03-2013, when the deceased K.E. Nagaraja was returning to his village with pillion rider in Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. KA-17/EF-5023 after purchasing clothes in Davanagere, on the left side of the road in a moderate speed, by following all traffic rules and regulations, near Thyavanagi village, a passenger Bus bearing Registration No. KA-16/A-9643 came from opposite direction, at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and was unconscious and was immediately shifted to SSM Hospital, Davangere, and thereafter shifted to Apollo Hospital, Bangalore for better treatment. But, unfortunately, in spite of the best treatment and medication, deceased K.E. Nagaraj succumbed to the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, on 31-03-2013 at about 5:45 P.M.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 36 years, an agriculturist and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants have lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance, apart from social, financial and moral support and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.

On account of the death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 22nd May, 2014. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 8,47,000/-under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

We have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and also the Insurer, for quite some time.

Learned counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in not assessing the reasonable income of the deceased. A sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month assessed by Tribunal is on the lower side. He submits that the claimants are none other than the wife, two minor children and parents of deceased and deceased was the only earning member in the family and the deceased used to spend the entire earnings for the welfare of his family. Therefore, he submitted that, considering the age avocation and the year of accident, reasonable monthly income may be re-assessed, and by deducting 1/4th towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency.

He further submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and therefore, the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency as also conventional heads.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer vehemently submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal is after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also taking into consideration the age, avocation and also the year of accident etc.. Therefore, interference in the same is not called for. However, he fairly submitted that reasonable compensation may be awarded towards conventional heads, in view of the latest judgments of the Apex Court and this Court in hosts of judgments and the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified, in accordance with law.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for our consideration in this appeal is,

"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

The undisputed facts of the case are, the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased K.E. Nagaraja. The claimants are none other than the wife, aged about 32 years, two minor children, aged about 7 years and 5 years, and parents aged about 75 years and 68 years at the time of accident. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 36 years and working as an agriculturist. It is stated that he was earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. But, to substantiate the same, the claimants have not produced any credible documentary evidence. But, the Tribunal is also not justified in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at only Rs. 5,000/-. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed. The deceased was the sole earning member in the family and he used to spend the entire earnings for the welfare of his family. His untimely death has resulted in great loss to the family. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of accident, being 2013, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 8,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Further, as the dependents are five in number, we deduct 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If 1/4th (i.e. Rs. 2,000/-) is deducted from Rs. 8,000/-towards his personal and living expenses, the net income would be Rs. 6,000/- per month. Further, it is stated that the deceased was aged about 36 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, for the said age, the proper multiplier applicable is ''15'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) ACJ 1298 : AIR 2009 SC 3104 : (2009) CLT 1055 : (2009) 6 JT 495 : (2009) 6 SCALE 129 : (2009) 6 SCC 121 : (2009) 5 SCR 1098 : (2009) 5 UJ 2280 : (2009) AIRSCW 4992 : (2009) 3 Supreme 487 as rightly adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 10,80,000/- (i.e. Rs. 6,000/- x 12 x''15'') as against Rs. 6,75,000/-awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. In the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and considering the fact that the wife was aged just 32 years, minor children aged 7 years and 5 years and aged parents, we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium as against Rs. 10,000/-; Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate as against Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 1,25,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each claimant as against Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 18,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Further, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- awarded by Tribunal towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses is just and proper and does not call for interference.

Further, it can be seen that the deceased was hospitalized at SSM Hospital Davanagere and thereafter, he was shifted to Apollo Hospital, Bangalore for better treatment, and in spite of the best treatment he succumbed to the injuries on the next day. During this period, the claimants would have spent some sum towards medical expenses. The Tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs. 89,000/- towards medical expenses and we accept the same.

Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 14,59,000/- as against Rs. 8,47,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 6,12,000/-.

Further, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for claimants, the rate of interest at 6% per annum awarded by Tribunal is on the lower side, as the accident has occurred on 30-03-2013. Therefore, as per the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper to award rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 22nd May 2014, passed in MVC No. 583/2013, by the Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-8, Thirthahalli, Shivamogga, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 14,59,000/- as against Rs. 8,47,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 6,12,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The third respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 6,12,000/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of first appellant -wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of fifth appellant - mother of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of five years, renewable by five years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of second and third appellants - minor children of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, till they attain the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to appellant No. 1 to withdraw the periodical interest for their welfare till they attain the age of 21 years and from 22 years to 30 years, they are entitled to withdraw their periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 2,12,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1, 4 and 5, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.

Shri. B. Pradeep, learned counsel is permitted to file vakalath on behalf of third respondent/Insurer, within four weeks from today.