Padmavathi and Others vs Ramanna and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal is filed by the claimants against the impugned judgment and award dated, 18.09.2013 passed in MVC No. 173/2012 on the file of the VIII Additional SCJ and XXXIII CMM, Member, MACT at Bengaluru (SCCH-5), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for brevity) awarding compensation of s. 10,4/,800,/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till he, date of realisation, on account of the death of A.S. Krishnamurthy in a road traffic accident. On the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, the claimants have presented this appeal.

Brief facts of the case in hand are:

Appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor children and appellant No. 4 is the mother of the deceased A.S. Krishnamurthy. The claimants contend that the deceased was hale and healthy prior to the accident. On an ill-fated day i.e., on 31.08.2011, at about 11.30 p.m., when the deceased A.S. Krishnamurthy and others were traveling in a hired Goods Tempo bearing registration No. KA 41/6589 at Magadi, Bangalore main road, at Machohalli Gate, Dasanapura Hobli, the Tempo turned and turtled at that place due to negligent driving by its driver. Due to the-impact, the deceased sustained grievous injurious and immediately, he was shifted to NIMHANS Hospital, Bangalore, where after treatment he was referred to Victoria Hospital, Bangalore. But on 03.09.2011, he succumbed to the injuries.

It is the further case of the claimants that they have lost the head of the family. The claimants contend that they were depending on the deceased for their livelihood and they have lost love and affection, inspiration and guidance and the mother of the deceased has suffered mental pain and agony. The deceased was, an, agriculturist and businessman owning a flour mill and a Ragi Cleaning machine, getting an income of Rs. 20,000/- p.m. They also contend that the deceased was the only bread winner of the family and the first appellant has lost her soul mate, the minor children have lost moral support of the deceased and the mother is deprived of seeing the bright future of her son. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants - claimants were constrained, to file a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act claiming compensation of Rs. 30,00,000/- against the respondents on account of the death of A.S. Krishnamurthy in road traffic accident. The claim petition filed by the claimants came up for consideration before the Tribunal and the Tribunal in turn after perusal of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, allowed the claim petition in part awarding a sum of Rs. 10,47,800/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Being dissatisfied with the same, the claimants have presented this appeal.

We have heard Sri H.V. Bhanu Prakash, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri B.C. Seetharama Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent � Insurance Company.

Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the tribunal has erred in not assessing the reasonable income of the deceased. The deceased was aged between 41 and 45 years, an agriculturist and a businessman, owning a Flour mill and also a Ragi Cleaning Machine. He was earning Rs. 20,000/- p.m. But the tribunal has taken only Rs. 6,000/- p.m., as his monthly income, which is on the lower side. He further submits that the tribunal has awarded meager amount towards conventional heads and what is awarded is inadequate. He further submitted that the rate of interest at 6% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal is also on the lower side. As per the catena of judgments of the Apex Court and this Court, the rate of interest may be modified and atleast 9% or 10% p.a. interest may be awarded. Therefore, he prays to award reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and conventional heads.

Per contra, learned Counsel for the second respondent insurance company contended that the tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation after due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence available on record and interference by this Court is uncalled for.

After critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, available On-record, and considering the submission made by the learned Counsel for both parties and after perusal of the impugned judgment and award, the only point that arise for our consideration is:

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?

The occurrence of the accident and the death of the deceased A.S. Krishnamurthy are not in dispute. Further, it is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged between 41 and 45 years and the claimants are wife, minor children and mother of the deceased. The deceased was an agriculturist and a businessman owning a Flour mill and a Ragi Cleaning Machine. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income at only Rs. 6,000/- p.m. The accident is of the year 2011 and the dependents are four in number. Therefore, we can safely re-assess income at Rs. 8,000/- p.m. and after deducting 1/4th towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the net income of the deceased comes to Rs. 6,000/- (Rs. 8,000/- - Rs. 2,000/-). As per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of 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 , the appropriate multiplier applicable is ''14''. Accordingly, we re-determine the loss of dependency'' at Rs. 10,08,000/- (Rs. 6,000/- x 12 x 14) as against Rs. 9,82,800/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to award Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses as against the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the interest of justice.

As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellants, the rate of interest at 6% p.a. awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side and hence, we deem it fit to award 9% p.a. on the enhanced compensation.

For the foregoing reasons, the instant appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in pare. The impugned judgment and award 18.09.2013 passed in MVC No. 173/2012 on the file of the VIII Additional SCJ and XXXIII ACMM, Member, MACT (SCCH-5), Bengaluru is hereby modified.

The appellants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 12,53,000/- as against Rs. 10,47,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 2,10,200/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.

R2 -- Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest at 9% p.a. within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,10,200/- a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in F.D. in the name of appellant No. 1, in any Nationalised or Scheduled or Grameena bank for a period of 10 years and renewable for another 10 years, with liberty to withdraw the interest periodically.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in F.D. in the name of appellant No. 4/mother of the deceased, in and Nationalised or Scheduled or Grameena bank for a period of 5 years and renewable for another 5 years, with liberty to her to withdraw the interest periodically.

Remaining Rs. 60,200/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the first appellant immediately on deposit of the said sum by R2-Insurance Company.

Office to draw the award, accordingly.