Jogendra Singh and Another vs Harjinder Singh and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

This is claimants'' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, ''the Tribunal'') vide award dated 3.12.2003, passed in Claim Case No. 45/2003.

The appellants/claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Kuldip Singh claimed compensation of Rs. 12,00,000/-, by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 12.12.2002, when the Truck on which he was deputed as Conductor/Cleaner met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of its driver and fell in a ''Nala'', resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot itself. The claimants further pleaded that their son Kuldip Singh was aged about 30 years and used to earn Rs. 4,000/- per month as Conductor/ Cleaner.

The owner, driver and insurer of the Truck contested the claim and-denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The insurer took the further plea that the driver of the Truck was not holding a valid driving licence and the Truck was being plied in breach of the policy conditions.

The claimants examined AW1 Teerokaur, AW2 Sarabjeet Singh and AW3 Surjeet Singh in support of their claim, whereas the driver, owner and insurer of the Truck did not examine any witness in rebuttal.

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led before it held that the claimants'' son Kuldip Singh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 12.12.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Truck; as the Truck in question, on the date of the accident, was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 2,500/- per month and Rs. 30,000/- per annum. By deducting l/3rd of Rs. 30,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 20,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 20,000/- with the multiplier of 8, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,62,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Kuldip Singh in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri R. Pradhan and Shri Harsh Mahant, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants'' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 2,500/- per month and Rs. 30,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 8; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,62,000/-only.

Shri Abhishek Sinha, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the Tribunal has been quite liberal in awarding substantial amount of Rs. 1,62,000/- as compensation to the claimants.

The findings recorded by the Tribunal that the claimants'' son Kuldip Singh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 12.12.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Truck; the Insurer of the Truck was liable to pay compensation to the claimants have now attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award. That apart, these findings are not under challenge before us in this appeal. We, therefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribunal.

The claimants pleaded that deceased Kuldip Singh used to earn Rs. 4,000/- per month as Conductor/Cleaner. The salary certificate issued by the owner of the Truck Ex.P/6 was produced before the Tribunal. AW3-Surjeet Singh, the owner of the Truck also stated in his statement before the Tribunal that a sum of Rs. 3,500/- per month was paid as salary to deceased Kuldip Singh. It is further in his evidence that a sum of Rs. 100/- per day was being paid to him as daily allowance.

In view of the evidence of AW-3 Surjeet Singh, the owner of the Truck and employer of deceased Kuldip Singh, assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs. 2,500/- per month and Rs. 30,000/- per annum is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration.

The daily allowance of Rs. 100/- per day, which was being paid by the owner of the Truck to deceased Kuldip Singh was meant for his personal expenses while on tour. In this view of the matter, the sum of Rs. 100/- per day paid as daily allowance, cannot be taken into consideration while assessing the income of the deceased. Since the evidence of AW3 Surjeet Singh establishes the income of the deceased to the extent of Rs. 3,500/- per month, we assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,500/- per month and Rs. 42,000/-per annum.

As deceased Kuldip Singh was unmarried on the date of the accident and the claimants are parents of the deceased and after the marriage of the deceased, his contribution to the parents would have been reduced substantially, we deem it appropriate to deduct 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. By deducting 50% of Rs. 42,000/-towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency is assessed at Rs. 21,000/- per month.

Considering that the parents of the deceased were shown to be aged about 62 years and 58 years in the claim petition, the multiplier of 8 selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with.

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 21,000/- with the multiplier of 8, the compensation works out to Rs. 1,68,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to get Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/-towards loss of estate. The claimants, thus become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 1,78,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Kuldip Singh in the motor accident.

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.

Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 16,000/- at Rs. 4,000/-.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,78,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 4,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.16,000/-.

Respondent No. 3 - the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, is granted three months'' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. 16,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 4,000/- towards the quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 16,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal.

No order as to costs.