Manoj Kumar and Others vs Jeril Sebastian and Others

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

This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 20/02/2015, passed in MVC No. 38/2013, by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjangud, (hereinafter referred to as '' Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 6,35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its deposit, as against the claim Rs. 41,30,000/-, on account of the death of their mother, Smt. Bhagya, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellants are the minor children of the deceased Smt. Bhagya. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal through their guardian, grandmother under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents and making their father-K.C. Guruswamy as respondent No. 6 on account of the death of their mother, in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 14.12.2012 at 1.00 p.m. deceased was returning to their village along with one Manjunatha and his son Udayakumar on his motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.10.J.5114 after getting treatment to Udayakumar at Government Hospital, Nanjangud as he is suffering from ill health. When they came near Nanjangud-Gundalpet Main road near Deveramanahalli playa gate and are crossing the road from left side to right side by applying right side indicator signal, at that time, rider of the motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.01.ET.2282 came with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motor cycle in which deceased was traveling. Due to which, they fell down and immediately they have been taken to Government Hospital Nanjangud for treatment and deceased Smt. Bhagya, mother of the appellants succumbed to the injuries in the hospital."

It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 32 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and working as coolie and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing her entire earnings to the family. Due to her untimely death, appellants have lost their mother and are deprived the love and affection, guidance and security of their mother and also suffered financial loss as they have lost their bread earner, apart from mental shock and agony.

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 file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 6,35,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its deposit.

Being dis- satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal through their guardian, grandmother, for enhancement of compensation.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.

The submission of the learned counsel Smt. B.N. Manjula, for Sri. R.C. Nagaraj, appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 4,500/- per month is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced, on the ground that, deceased was aged about 32 years, she was a home maker and also doing Coolie and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month and her husband has been arrayed as respondent No. 5 and therefore, her income may be reassessed reasonably, after deducting 1/3rd towards her personal and living expenses and applying multiplier of ''14'', taking the age of her husband as 44 years, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further, she submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads and the rate of interest is on the lower side as the accident is of the year 2012 and is liable to be enhanced reasonably in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court. Therefore, she submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.

As against this, learned counsel Sri. B. Pradeep, appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference.

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

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

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that deceased was aged about 32 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, home maker and also doing coolie and the appellants are her children and her husband has been arrayed as respondent No. 5. On account of the death of the deceased, appellants who are minor children of the deceased are deprived of the love and affection, guidance and security and husband has lost his companion. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month, which is on the lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Having regard to the age and occupation of the deceased and the year of accident, we re-assess her income at Rs. 6,500/- per month to meet the ends of justice instead of Rs. 4,500/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if 1/3rd ( Rs. 2,166/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, her net contribution to the family comes to Rs. 4,334/- per month. The appropriate multiplier applicable is ''14'' since the husband of the deceased was aged about 44 years at the time of the death of the deceased instead ''16'' adopted by the Tribunal taking the age of the deceased. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 7,28,112/- ( Rs. 4,334/- x 12 x 14) as against Rs. 5,76,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above and on account of the untimely death of the deceased, appellants are deprived of the love and affection, guidance and security of their mother and her husband has lost his companion and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court and this Court, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 75,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to the each of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 and respondent No. 5, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses.

However, a sum of Rs. 19,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses of the deceased as per the medical bills is just and proper and therefore, it does not call for interference.

In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 9,72,112/- instead of Rs. 6,35,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.

Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 6% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2012. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realization on the enhanced compensation instead of 6% per annum awarded by the Tribunal.

There would be an enhancement of Rs. 3,37,112/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned common judgment and award dated 20/02/2015, passed in MVC No. 38/2013, by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjangud, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 3,37,112/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,37,112/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Immediately on deposit by the Insurer, the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,37,112/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of each of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, till they attain 30 years, with liberty reserved to the guardian, grandmother of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically, till they attain 21 years for their welfare and from 22 years to 30 years, they are at liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,37,112/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant Nos. 1 and 2 through their guardian, grandmother, in equal proportion.

Draw the award accordingly.