R. Jagadish, R. Laxmidevi vs Kotesh Gouda and The Divisional Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.—Though the matter is listed today for orders, by consent of learned counsel appearing on both the sides, matter is heard for final disposal. This appeal is by the claimants in MVC No. 1432/2008 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and MACT, Gulbarga and is directed against the judgment and award dated 01.12.2010.

The appellants-claimants are dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation. Their grievance is with regard to the Tribunal reckoning the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- p.m., though they have produced acceptable evidence to show that he was working as an electrician and was earning not less than Rs. 6,000/- p.m. The other grievance sought to be made out by the appellants is that the Tribunal has adopted a multiplier of 15'' with reference to the age of the mother while the appropriate multiplier should have been with reference to the age of the deceased.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing on both the sides.

The appellants-claimants have specifically contended that the deceased aged about 19 years was an electrician and was earning not less than Rs. 6,000/- p.m. from the said work. Of course, except the oral say of the claimants there was no other acceptable evidence to substantiate the said contention. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in not accepting the contention of the claimants with regard to the vocation pursued by the deceased. Nevertheless, having regard to the fact that the accident occurred on 28.4.2008 and regard being had to the cost of living and inflationary trend during that period and keeping in mind the observations made in several decisions of the Apex Court including the decision in Sri Ramachandrappa Vs. The Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, , the monthly income reckoned by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- is certainly on the lower side. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the interest of justice would be served by reckoning the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- p.m. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Amrit Bhanu Shali and Others Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others, , the multiplier in a case of this nature should be with reference to the age of the deceased. In view of the fact that the deceased was 19 years old, the appropriate multiplier applicable was ''18''. The Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% of the monthly income of the deceased towards living and personal expenses. In the light of the above discussion, the loss of dependency on the basis of monthly income of Rs. 4,500/- works out to Rs. 4,86,000/- (4500 x 12 x 18/2) as against Rs. 2,70,000/- under the head of loss of dependency. The awards under the conventional heads being just and proper does not warrant interference. In the result the appeal is allowed in part enhancing the compensation payable under the head of loss of dependency to Rs. 4,86,000/- in place of Rs. 2,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all other aspects, the award of the Tribunal is left undisturbed. The enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,16,000/- shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment. The respondent-insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within six weeks from today. 90% of the enhanced compensation with proportionate interest shall be kept in the Fixed Deposit in the name of 2nd claimant; the mother of the deceased with liberty to her to withdraw periodical interest accrued thereon. The balance amount shall be disbursed to her.