Mangala and Others vs Vijayashankar P.B. and Others

N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 13th August 2014, passed in MVC No. 184/2012, by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 8,39,660/- 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 wife and three children of the deceased Shivaprasad @ Prasad. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 5:00 P.M, on 05-05-2012, when the deceased was going near Sheshagirihalli Bus Stand, Bidadi Hobli and walking on the left side of the road, a Goods Tempo bearing Registration No. KA-01/A-1524 proceeding from Mysore towards Bangalore, came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased Shivaprasad. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down and suffered grievous injuries all over the body and was immediately shifted to Rajarajeshwari Hospital and from there, while being shifted to another Hospital in Bangalore, unfortunately, he died on the way on the same day.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 40 years, working as loader, earning a sum of Rs. 300/- per day apart from Rs. 50/- as daily batta 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 13th August, 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. 8,39,660/- 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, Shri. S. Raju vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 5,850/- per month, after adding 30%. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed for the reason that, the deceased was aged about 40 years and working as loader and the accident has occurred during 2012. Therefore, he submitted that, reasonable monthly income of the deceased may be re-assessed and reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency, by adopting proper multiplier and deducting 1/4th towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, as the claimants are four in number. 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.

He also submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% per annum is also on the lower side, for the reason that as per the law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, the claimants are entitled to higher rate of interest, at least between 9% to 10% per annum. Therefore, the rate of interest may also be redetermined.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer, Shri. S.Y. Shivalli sought to substantiate the judgment and award passed by Tribunal, stating that the same is passed 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.

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. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 40 years and loader by profession. The claimants are none other than the wife and three children. The Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased Rs. 4,500/- and added 30% towards future prospects of the deceased and arrived at Rs. 5,850/- per month as the income of deceased. The same is on the lower side for the reason that the accident is of the year 2012. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation and number of dependents of the deceased and also the year of accident, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,500/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Further, as the dependents are four in number, we deduct 1/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If 1/4th (i.e. Rs. 1,875/-) is deducted from Rs. 7,500/- towards his personal and living expenses, the net income would be Rs. 5,625/- per month. Further, it is stated that the deceased was aged about 40 years at the time of his death in the road traffic 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. 10,12,500/- (i.e. Rs. 5,625/- x 12 x''15'') as against Rs. 7,89,660/- 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 also the facts and circumstances of the case, 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. 20,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each claimant as against Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 12,62,500/- as against Rs. 8,39,660/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 4,22,840/-.

Further, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for claimants that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% per annum is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred on 05-05-2012, in view of 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 13th August 2014, passed in MVC No. 184/2012, by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 12,62,500/- as against Rs. 8,39,660/- 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. 4,22,840/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,22,840/-, 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. 2,00,000/- 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 fifteen years, renewable by ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the names of appellant Nos. 2 to 4- children of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, till they attain the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 1/mother and natural guardian 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 respective periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 72,840/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant No. 1, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.

Shri. S.Y. Shivalli, learned counsel is permitted to file vakalath on behalf of second respondent/Insurer, within four weeks.