Jabeen Taj and Others vs Madhusudhan C. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 20th October 2014, passed in MVC No. 8/2013, by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 7,69,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 25,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the mother, two brothers and sister of deceased Asif Pasha @ Meetu. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 12:00 Noon, on 09-01-2013, when the deceased was going on his motor cycle from Magadi to Ramanagara on B.M. Road, at U turn, a Swift Car bearing Registration No. KA-41/N-1279 came from behind in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed and dashed against the motor cycle. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down and sustained severe injuries and died on the way to the Hospital.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 22 years and working as Mechanic, earning Rs. 10,500/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants/mother, two brothers and sister have lost the love and affection, social and moral support apart from financial security 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 20th October, 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. 7,69,000/- 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 learned counsel appearing for appellants and learned counsel appearing for Insurer, for quite some time.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 4,500/- per month. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed for the reason that the deceased was aged about 22 years and working as Mechanic and looking after the family by earning Rs. 10,500/- per month and on account of his untimely death, the family is under severe financial crisis and they have lost the love and affection, guidance and inspiration in life. Therefore, he vehemently submitted that reasonable income may be re-assessed and deducting 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased and by adopting the multiplier of ''18'', considering the age of the deceased, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court in host of judgments, award reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency. Further, he submitted that the claimants are entitled to higher compensation towards the conventional heads as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments as the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation.

Further, learned counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred on 09-01-2013 and in view of the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, at least 9% to 10% interest per annum may be awarded in the instant case, to meet the ends of justice and the impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for second respondent - Insurer sought to justify the impugned judgment and award stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased having regard to his age, avocation and the year of accident. Therefore, interference in the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is not called for.

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 at about 12:00 Noon on 09-01-2013 and the resultant death of the deceased Asif Pasha @ Meetu. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 22 years and working as Mechanic. It is stated that he was earning a sum of Rs. 10,500/- per month. To substantiate the same, the appellants have not produced any credible documents. The accident is of the year 2013. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation, number of dependents being mother, two brothers and sister and also the year of accident, we reassess the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Since the deceased was a bachelor, we deduct 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If 50% (i.e. Rs. 3,500/-) is deducted from Rs. 7,000/- towards his personal expenses, the net income would be Rs. 3,500/-per month. The deceased was aged about 22 years. In the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments including Munnalal Jain''s case, we consider the age of the deceased for computing compensation payable towards loss of dependency. In the instant case, the deceased was aged about 22 years and therefore, the proper multiplier applicable is ''18'' as rightly adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 7,56,000/- (i.e. Rs. 3,500/- x 12 x''18'') as against Rs. 7,29,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. The same is on the lower side. As per the decision of the Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, we award a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-towards loss of love and affection, at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- to each appellant as against Rs. 10,000/-; Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate as against Rs. 20,000/-; and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Thus the total compensation works out to Rs. 10,06,000/- as against Rs. 7,69,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for appellants, the rate of interest at 6% per annum awarded by Tribunal is on the lower side, as the accident has occurred on 09-01-2013. 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 entire compensation.

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 20th October 2014, passed in MVC No. 8/2013, by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 10,06,000/- as against Rs. 7,69,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 2,37,000/- with 9% interest per annum on the entire compensation of Rs. 10,06,000/-, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The second respondent - Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,37,000/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum on entire compensation of Rs. 10,06,000/-, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- shall be invested in the name of appellant No. 1/mother of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 87,000/- with interest at 9% per annum on the entire compensation of Rs. 10,06,000/-shall be released in favour of appellant No. 1, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.