Madan Lal vs M.P. S.R.T.C. and Others

Deepak Verma, J.—For the death of a young person aged 24 years in a road accident, the 4th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 142/97 has awarded only a sum of Rs. 2,06,000/- to the parents. Being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation this appeal has been preferred for the enhancement. During the pendency of claim petition, father of deceased also died, therefore, other LRs were brought on record.

That on 26th March, 1991 while deceased Prathmesh Gupta was travelling in his Maruti van along with his france met with a road accident. The accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of a bus belonged to respondent 1 and was being driven by respondent 2 at the time of accident. Before the Tribunal the respondents herein filed the written statement denying their liability on the ground that respondent 2 was not responsible for causing the accident. However, they were allowed by the Tribunal to proceed ex parte against them. Neither they adduced any evidence in support of their defence nor cross-examined the witnesses in support of the claim petition. The Tribunal on the basis of the evidence held that respondent 2 was responsible for causing the accident. The Tribunal further held that at the time of the accident the age of the deceased was only 24 years. These findings of the Tribunal, as mentioned hereinabove, have not been challenged before us, hence the same are confirmed.

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal erred in holding that annual income of the deceased was only Rs. 18,000/ - Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants also criticised the application of multiplier. According to him multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Learned Counsel fcr the appellants has drawn out attention to the pass book of the deceased account with the United Western Bank Ltd. Ex. P. 9. Perusal of the entries in the pass book reveals that not only withdrawal but deposits were also made in the said account from time-to-time. A.W. 1 Smt. Shobhadevi, the mother of the deceased in her deposition had stated that deceased was unmarried and was doing his own business in metal scraps. A.W. 1 further stated that from the year 1988 when the deceased started his business the deceased used to spend some amount on the parents and at the time of the accident deceased in Act had spent Rs. 77,000/- on the parents. Thus, according to her the annual income of the deceased was Rs. 31,000/-. Thus, the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants cannot claim the virtue of infallibility. It is common knowledge that in a claim case income of the deceased is always exaggerated in order to fetch maximum amount of compensation. From the entries in the pass book it cannot be inferred that the annual income of the deceased was Rs. 31,000/-. Since the deceased was in private business the withdrawal are not necessarily only for spending it on the parents. It might have been incurred in connection with business also. Thus, in our considered opinion the annual income of the deceased can be taken at Rs. 25,000/-. After deducting the conventional 1/3rd amount, the annual dependency of the parents alone comes to Rs. 17,000/- in round figure. Looking to the age of the deceased at the time of accident, we apply a multiplier of 18. Thus, future loss of dependency of Smt. Shobhadevi alone comes to Rs. 3,06,000/-. To this we add a sum of Rs. 24,000/- towards loss of company, loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, etc. Thus, the mother of the deceased namely Smt. Shobhadevi alone is entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 3,30,000/- from the respondents jointly and severally. Out of amount of compensation so awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (One lakhs fifty thousand) shall be kept in F.D.R. of any Nationalised Bank initially for a period of 5 years. The balance amount shall be paid to Smt. Shobhadevi Gupta. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% from the date of the application till it is actually paid to the appellant.

The appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. Respondent 1 shall bear cost throughout. Counsel fee Rs. 1,000/-(one thousand) if certified.