Nagashetty and Others vs Basappa Danooru and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 16th April 2015, passed in MVC No. 59/2014, by the Senior Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjangud, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 5,31,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 38,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the parents of deceased Kumara. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 09:30 P.M., on 02-02-2014, when the deceased Kumara was returning to his village on his Hero Honda Splendor Pro Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. KA-09/EY-9023, on Hunsur-Mysuru Road, near Kolagatta village, at that time, the driver of KSRTC Bus bearing Registration No. KA-09/F-1623, drove the same at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous head injuries. Immediately, he was taken to K.R. Hospital, Mysuru for treatment and as per the advice of the Doctors, the deceased was shifted to J.S.S. Hospital, Mysuru for further treatment, but unfortunately, he succumbed to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident on the next day, i.e. on 03/02/2014 at JSS Hospital, Mysuru.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 20 years and working as Coolie, earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased Kumara, the claimants/parents have lost the love and affection, social and moral support apart from financial security 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 16th April, 2015. 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. 5,31,000/- under different heads, with 9% 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 learned counsel appearing for appellants and learned counsel appearing for second Respondent/Corporation, for quite some time.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellants, Ms. B.N. Manjula, at the outset is that, the Tribunal grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 4,500/- per month. The same is on the lower side and liable to be reassessed for the reason that the deceased was a young and energetic boy, aged about 20 years and working as Coolie, earning substantial sum and looking after the welfare of the family and he was the only earning member in the family and on account of his untimely death, the parents are in financial distress. Further, on account of his untimely death, the family has lost the love and affection, guidance and inspiration in life. Therefore, she vehemently submitted that reasonable income may be re-assessed, having regard to the age, avocation and also the year of accident, being 2014 and deducting 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased and by adopting the multiplier of ''18'', taking the age of the deceased, in the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Munna Lal Jain and Others Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Others , reasonable compensation be towards loss of dependency.

Further, she submitted that the claimants are entitled to higher compensation towards the conventional heads also as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions. Therefore, she submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is liable to be modified by enhancing the compensation reasonably.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for second respondent - Corporation sought to justify the impugned judgment and award stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased having regard to his age and the year of accident. Therefore, interference in the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal 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 Kumara. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 20 years and working as a Coolie. It is stated that he was earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. To substantiate the same, the appellants have not produced any credible documents. The accident is of the year 2014. The Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/-. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed. Therefore, in the absence of any credible documentary evidence, having regard to the age, avocation and also the year of accident being 2014, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 8,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Further, since the deceased was a bachelor, we deduct 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If 50% (i.e. Rs. 4,000/-) is deducted from Rs. 8,000/- towards his personal expenses, the net income would be Rs. 4,000/- per month. The deceased was aged about 20 years at the time of accident. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court in Munna Lal Jain and Others Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Others , the age of the deceased is to be taken into consideration for adopting the multiplier, for calculating loss of dependency. In the instant case, for the age of the deceased being 20 years, the proper multiplier applicable is ''18''. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 8,64,000/- (i.e. Rs. 4,000/- x 12 x''18'') as against Rs. 4,86,000/- 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, we award a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate as against Rs. 10,000/-; Rs. 50,000/- 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.

Further, it can be seen that the deceased survived for one day before succumbing to the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. During this period, the claimants would have spent some reasonable sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical and incidental expenses. The Tribunal, after evaluation of the medical bills and prescriptions has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards medical and other incidental expenses. The same is just and proper and hence, accepted.

Further, it is seen that the Tribunal grossly erred in awarding compensation of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium. The same is not sustainable nor permissible in case of death of a bachelor. Therefore, the same is set aside.

Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 9,69,000/- as against Rs. 5,31,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 4,38,000/-.

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 16th April 2015, passed in MVC No. 59/2014, by the Senior Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjangud, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 9,69,000/- as against Rs. 5,31,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 4,38,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The second respondent - Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,38,000/-, 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 Corporation, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the names of each of appellant Nos. 1 and 2/parents of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by five years, with liberty reserved to them to withdraw their respective periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,38,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of both the appellants, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.