Nera Bai (Smt.) and Others vs Gangadhar and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—This is claimants appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the 4th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur District Raipur (for short ''the Tribunal") vide award dated 01.08.2002, passed in Claim Case No. 04/2002.

The claimants unfortunate widow, mother and minor son of deceased Vishnu Sahu claimed compensation of Rs. 19,00,000/- by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 29.07.1999 when he was dashed by the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. M.H. 31 M. 5581, resulting in serious injuries to Vishnu Sahu, who succumbed to those injuries on his way to the hospital. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Vishnu Sahu used to earn Rs. 100/- per day by running a cycle shop and in addition to that, he had agricultural income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum.

The driver and owner of the truck did not contest the claim and remained ex parte before the Tribunal. The insurer of the truck contested the claim and denied its liability to pay compensation to the claimants on the plea that the driver of the truck was not holding a valid driving licence and the truck was being plied in breach of the policy conditions.

The claimants examined A.W.-1 Smt. Mankunwar Bai and A.W.-2 Sukhchand Sahu in support of their claim whereas the insurer of the offending vehicle truck did not examine any witness in rebuttal.

The Tribunal on a thorough scrutiny of the evidence led before it held that deceased Vishnu Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 29.07.1999; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle truck; as the offending vehicle truck on the date of the accident was insured with National Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

The tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 15,000/- per annum on the basis of notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule u/s 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting l/3rd of Rs. 15,000/- toward personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants; dependency was assessed at Rs. 10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,60,000/-. The Tribunal, therefore, awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Vishnu Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/-@ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri A.S. Singraul, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 15,000/- per annum only in not awarding any amount towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium to the widow and loss of estate; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/-only.

Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 3 National Insurance Company on the other hand supported the award and submitted that the compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Vishnu Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 29.07.1999; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck; and the insurer of the truck was liable to pay compensation to the claimants have now attained finality, as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award. That apart, there is overwhelming evidence available on record to establish the above facts beyond any shadow of doubt. We, therefore, affirm the findings recorded by the Tribunal.

True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Vishnu Sahu used to earn Rs. 100/- per day by running a cycle shop and Rs. 15,000/- per annum from agriculture, the evidence lead in that behalf was not of clinching nature. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants evidence about the income of the deceased.

Nevertheless, the income of Rs. 15,000/- assessed by the Tribunal on the basis of notional income is certainly on the lower side. The notional income Rs. 15,000/- was prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994. If the increase in prices of the essential commodities and the cost of living between 1994 to 1999, the year of accident in the present case in taken into account, the notional income of Rs. 15000/- prescribed in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs. 21,000/- in the year 1999. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 21,000/- per annum.

By deducting usual l/3rd of Rs. 21,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency comes to Rs. 14,000/-per annum.

Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and his minor son, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case.

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 14,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs. 2,10,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium to the window; and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Vishnu Sahu in the motor accident.

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute about the period for which the claimants should get interest on the enhanced amount of compensation and the delay in computation of the interest by the Tribunal, the interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.

Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 65,000/-at Rs. 20,000/-.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 2,25,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 20,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 65,000/-.

Respondent No. 3/Oriental Insurance company Ltd., is granted three months'' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 85,000/- (Rs. 65,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 20,000/- towards the quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation) before the concerning Claims Tribunal.

No order as to costs.