L. Chinnaswamy and Others vs Mani N. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—Though this matter is posted in the orders list, it is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for both the parties.

This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 26.04.2012 passed in MVC No. 1220/2011 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-II and Member, Addl. M.A.C.T., Mysore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) seeking to enhance the compensation.

The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded compensation of Rs. 3,85,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization on account of death of the deceased -C. Manjunath in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The 1st and 2nd appellants are the parents of the deceased-C. Manjunath and they filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 30,00,000/- against the respondents, on account of the untimely death of the deceased-C. Manjunath in the road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimants that on 04.07.2011 at about 5.00 p.m. the deceased was traveling as a pillion rider on the Suzuki Samurai motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-18-H-8023 along with his friends Shabhansh and V. Subramanya from Thalakadu towards Mysore. The motor cycle was ridden by B. Subramanya and he was driving slowly and cautiously on the left side of Mysore-T. Narasipura Road. Near the land of one Basappa near Duddagere Gate, the driver of the bus drove the same rashly and negligently with high speed and dashed against the said motor cycle. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries over his right eye, chin and also fracture of right thigh bone. The rider and another pillion rider died on the spot. The deceased succumbed to the injuries on the way to the hospital. Therefore, they were constrained to file a claim petition against the respondents claiming compensation. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding compensation of Rs. 3,85,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. Not being satisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants have presented this appeal for enhancement of compensation."

The submission of Sri. R. Pramod, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and conventional heads. Further, he submitted that deceased was aged about 21 years. He was studying in 3rd year B.E. Electricals and Electronics at Vidya Vikasa College, Mysore. In addition to his studies, he was doing agriculture and helping his parents in Badanavalu where their lands are situated and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. He was the only earning member of the family and the entire family was depending upon the income of the deceased. On account of his untimely death, the parents have suffered mental pain and agony and they are deprived to see the bright future of their son. It has also affected social, moral and economic condition of the family. This aspect has not been considered by the Tribunal nor it assessed the reasonable income of the deceased. Further, he is quick to point that the income of the deceased may be re-assessed between Rs. 8,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- per month. The deceased was a bachelor. In the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , 50% should be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Munna Lal Jain and Others Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Others . The age of the deceased may be taken for applying the multiplier. Therefore, he submitted that reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further, he is quick to point out that the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. He also submitted that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court in the host of the judgments, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Therefore, he submits to enhance the compensation and rate of interest by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3-msurer, inter alia, contended and substantiated that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. After due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal is justified in awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency. Therefore, he submitted that interference by this Court is not called for.

After considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:

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

Occurrence of accident and the resultant death of deceased are not in dispute. Claimants are none other than the parents of the deceased. Further, it is not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 21 years at the time of accident, hale and healthy. He was studying in 3rd year B.E. Electricals and Electronics at Vidya Vikasa college, Mysore. In addition to his studies, he was doing agriculture and helping his parents in Badanavalu where their lands are situated and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. He was the only earning member of the family and the entire family was depending upon the income of the deceased. On account of his untimely death, the parents have suffered mental pain and agony and they are deprived to see the bright future of their son. It has also affected social, moral and economic condition of the family. Having regard to the nature of accident, avocation and year of the accident, we can safely reassess the income of the deceased at Rs. 8,000/- per month. Out of which, if 50% towards personal expenses is to be deducted, the contribution of the deceased towards family comes to Rs. 4,000/- per month. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Munna Lal Jain and Ors. v. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Ors., reported in 2015 AIR SCW3105, if the age of the deceased is taken, T8'' is the appropriate multiplier for the age of the deceased and award a sum of Rs. 8,64,000/- (Rs. 4,000/- x 12 x 18) towards loss of dependency.

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to award Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each claimant, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. Hence, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for a compensation of Rs. 9,64,000/- as Rs. 3,85,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There will be an enhancement of Rs. 5,79,000/-.

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Following the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, we award 9% per annum interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 26.04.2012 passed in MVC No. 1220/2011 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-II and Member, Addl. M.A.C.T, Mysore, is hereby modified awarding an enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,79,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization, excluding interest for the delayed period of 632 days in filing the appeal.

The respondent No. 3-msurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, excluding interest for the delayed period of 632 days, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,79,000/-, Rs. 2,00,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, in the names of the 1st appellant for 5 years and renewable for another 5 years and in the name of the 2nd appellant-mother of the deceased for a period of Ten years and renewable for another Ten years, with liberty to them to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

The remaining Rs. 1,79,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the 1st and 2nd appellants, in equal proportion, immediately, on deposit by respondent No. 3-msurer.

Office to draw the award, accordingly.