Rajjo Bai and Others vs Ramprasad and Others

M.K. Mudgal, J.—This is an appeal filed by the claimants u/s 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 23.11.2012 passed by MACT Guna, in Claim case No. 12 of 2011. By the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,49,500/- with interest to the claimants for the death of one Ramwali Kushwah about 30 years of Age who died in vehicle accident on 19.12.2011. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement of Rs. 2,00,000/- in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have filed this appeal, so the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and if so to what extent? It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants'' favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross appeal or cross objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.

As observed supra, it is a death case. One Ramwali Kushwah about 30 years of Age who died in vehicle accident on 19.12.2011 with Tanker bearing No. GJ06-Z-9444 while he was returning to Guna on the Motorcycle with one Kallu Sengar giving rise to the filing of claim petition by legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking enhancement of compensation for his death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal after assessing income of deceased at Rs. 2500/- per month and applying the multiplier of 17 and holding that he was spending 1/3rd on himself as personal expenses by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimants as stated supra and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,49,500/- breakup of which is as under:--

Rs. 3,40,000/- Towards loss of dependency. Rs. 5000/- Towards loss of consortium, Rs. 2000/- Towards funeral expenses Rs. 2500/- Towards loss of estate;

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was husband of appellant No. 1 and father of appellant No. 2 and 3. Due to his death, the family has suffered great monetary loss. He used to earn money and spend the same on the family. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income at Rs. 2500/- per month (Rs. 30,000/- per annum) which is on the lower side. Opposing the submissions made by appellants'' counsel, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the monthly income of the deceased assessed by the claims Tribunal is appropriate as the deceased being labourer, had no fixed income.

Considered the arguments.

The wife of the deceased Rajjo Bai (AW1) deposing in para 2 of her statement has stated that her husband''s income was Rs. 6000/- per month. She has deposed in para 5 that her husband Ramwali was working at mobile tower however she did not know about the employer of her husband. No document regarding income has been produced on record even no statement of the employer has been got recorded in this respect. Even no other witness has been produced to prove the income of the deceased. The lone statement of (AW1) is not enough to prove the income of the deceased at Rs. 6000/- per month.

The learned trial court has determined the income of the deceased at Rs. 2500/- per month in para 14 of the award just on the basis of mere conjuncture. The deceased was 30 years old young man. He died in an accident in 2011. At that time, the rate of a labourer was approximately Rs. 125 to 150 per day. If the income is calculated on this basis, approximately his per month income would be around Rs. 3600/-. Hence, now the compensation is being determined on basis of monthly income of Rs. 3600/- per month as income of the deceased and making 1/3rd deduction towards the personal expenses his net income comes to Rs. 2400/- per month.

The learned Tribunal has rightly calculated the multiplier of 17. However, the learned tribunal has not awarded any sum for love and affection despite the fact that the deceased had two minor children. Moreover the amount of Rs. 2000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 5000/-for consortium is also on a lower side having considered the judgment in case of Rajesh and Others Vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, and Jiju Kuruvila and Others Vs. Kunjujamma Mohan and Others, .

Considering the aforesaid facts, the total amount of compensation works out to Rs. 5,49,500/-. The breakup of the said amount is as follows:--

(2400 X 12 X 17) = 4,89,600/-)

Rs. 4,89,600/- Loss of dependency,

Rs. 10000/- Funeral expenses;

Rs. 30000/- Loss of consortium.

Rs. 14900/- Loss of love and affection.

Rs. 5000/- Loss of estate.

Total: Rs. 5,49,500/-

The learned tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,49,500/- and it after having been deducted from Rs. 5,49,500/- as determined above results into Rs. 2,00,000/- and hence the compensation is enhanced by Rs. 2,00,000/-. The interest shall be payable at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. The enhanced amount shall be disbursed as per the norms of the impugned award. The cost of the appeal including court fee shall be borne by the respondents.

With the aforesaid modification the appeal stands disposed of. Memo of cost be drawn up accordingly.