Papanna and Others vs M. Bakkiam and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 09.07.2015 passed in MVC No. 21/2014 on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X at Tumkur, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) seeking to enhance the compensation.

The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded compensation of Rs. 2,63,200/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the realisation, as against the claim of the appellants on account of the death of the deceased-Hanumakka in the road traffic accident, after deducting 20% towards contributory negligence out of Rs. 3,29,000/-.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

The 1st appellant is the husband and 2nd, 3rd and 4th appellants are children of the deceased Hanumakka and they have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- against the respondents, on account of the untimely death of the deceased-Hanumakka in the road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimants that on 21.06.2013 at about 1.30 p.m. when the deceased and her son-in-law were returning from Hosure in TVS moped bearing No. KA-06-GM-0809 after taking treatment near Madhugiri-Gowribidanur road, at that time, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Lorry bearing No. KA-51-MA-9855, it dashed against the TVS moped, in which the deceased was traveling as a pillion rider. In the said accident, both the rider and the pillion rider sustained injuries. Immediately, they were shifted to Koratagere Hospital. Later the deceased Hanumakka was shifted to Government Hospital, Tumkur, where she succumbed to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. On account of sudden death of the deceased, 1st appellant being the husband lost the company of his life partner and the children have lost love and affection, guidance, inspiration and security in life. It has also affected social, moral and economic condition of the family. The deceased Hanumakka was aged about 51 years, hale and healthy and doing agriculture work and also doing milk vending business, earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. Therefore, they were constrained to file a claim petition against the respondents claiming compensation. 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 record, allowed the claim petition in part, assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased and awarded Rs. 3,29,000/- and after deducting 20% towards contributory negligence on the part of the rider of TVS Moped in which the deceased was traveling awarded Rs. 2,63,200/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. Not being satisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.

The submission of Sri. K. Shantharaj, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and the compensation awarded towards loss of estate, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection is on the lower side. It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 51 years at the time of accident, hale and healthy and doing agriculture work and also milk vending business. She was looking after the welfare of the family. She is the Head of the family. Due to her untimely death, they suffered socially and economically. Therefore, he submits that income of the deceased may be reassessed between Rs. 7,000/- & Rs. 7,500/- per month. Out of the said income, 1/3rd has to be deducted and considering the age of the deceased as 59 years, by applying the multiplier ''9'', reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Therefore, he submits that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified awarding just and reasonable compensation and also enhance the rate of interest.

As against this, Sri. D. Vijayakumar, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent contended that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. After due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal is justified in awarding reasonable compensation under all the heads. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:

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

It is not in dispute that the deceased died in the road traffic accident. Claimants are none other than the husband and children of the deceased. The deceased was aged about 51 years at the time of accident, hale and healthy and she was doing agriculture work and also milk vending business. Further the case of the claimants that she was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family. On account of her untimely death, the husband has lost his life partner and the children have lost love and affection, guidance, inspiration and security in life. It has also affected social, moral and economic condition of the family. The accident has occurred on 21.06.2013. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of the accident, we can safely reassess the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice, out of which, 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased as the claimants are not dependents. Accordingly, if 50% is deducted, it comes to Rs. 3,500/- per month. The deceased was aged about 51 years at the time of accident and therefore the appropriate multiplier applicable is 11. Accordingly, we re-determine the compensation towards loss of estate at Rs. 4,62,000/- ( Rs. 3500 x 12 x 11).

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to award Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium as against Rs. 20,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection as against Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses as against Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Further the Tribunal is justified in fixing 20% negligence on the part of the rider of the TVS moped, on which the deceased was traveling. The reasoning given by the Tribunal is after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record and therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

Further, the interest at 6% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The accident is of the year 2013. Following the judgment of the Supreme Court and this Court, we award the interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till its realisation. Hence, in all the appellants are entitled for Rs. 6,87,000/-. Out of entire compensation, 20% towards contributory negligence needs to be deducted. Accordingly, if Rs. 1,37,400/- ( Rs. 6,87,000/- x 20%) is deducted, the appellants are entitled for total compensation of Rs. 5,49,600/-. There will be an enhancement of Rs. 2,86,400/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 09.07.2015 passed in MVC No. 21/2014 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X, Tumkur, is hereby modified awarding a sum of Rs. 5,49,600/- as against Rs. 2,63,200/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation. There shall be enhancement of compensation of Rs. 2,86,400/-.

The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,86,400/- with interest shall be released in favour of appellant Nos. 1 to 4 immediately, in equal proportion on deposit by 2nd respondent-Insurance company.

Office to draw the award, accordingly.