AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Aniruddha P. Mayee, J
The present First Appeal impugns the judgment and award dated 28.4.2017 passed by the 5th Additional District Court and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Surendranagar in M.A.C.Petition No.1 of 2010.
The brief facts giving rise to the present First Appeal are as follows:-
2.1 That on 9.8.2009, at about 12:30 p.m. in the afternoon, the deceased was driving his tractor when the truck driven by the respondent No.2 dashed against the back side of the tractor, as it was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. As a result of the accident, the deceased sustained injuries and expired. At the time of the accident, the deceased was of 45 years of age and was hale and hearty. It was claimed that the deceased was a farmer earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,000/- by doing agricultural work on his land with latest technology. Accordingly, the appellants herein who are legal heirs of the deceased preferred claim petition being M.A.C.Petition No.1 of 2010 claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- against the respondents along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.
2.2 The parties completed their pleadings and on the basis of the pleadings, the following issues and findings came to be framed:-
“1. Whether it is proved that the deceased sustained injuries and died due to rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident?
Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation? If yes, what amount and from whom?
What award?
FINDINGS
In the affirmative.
As per final order.
As per final order.”
2.3 The parties led evidence in support of their contentions. The learned Tribunal, after perusing the evidence and considering the contentions raised by the parties, was pleased to partly allow the claim petition and held that the claimants are entitled to recover an amount of Rs.4,01,000/- by way of compensation from the respondents jointly and severally together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the realization. It was further directed that 70% of the amount of compensation be deposited in the learned Tribunal and the remaining be apportioned between the appellants herein in equal proportion.
2.4 Aggrieved, the appellants herein have preferred the present First Appeal.
Ms. Amrita Ajmera, learned advocate for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal erred in granting compensation on lower side. She submits that the deceased was a prosperous farmer having about 12 vighas of land and was doing agricultural work with his own tractor. She further submits that in support thereof, the appellants had also produced on record 7/12 extract of the agricultural land. She submits that even if there was no direct evidence showing the income of the deceased on record since the widow and her children could not produce the same, it could be safely assumed that the deceased was earning a good amount from his agricultural work. She submits that the learned Tribunal has not given any cogent reasons for considering the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month in order to grant compensation. She submits that even under the Minimum Wages Act, unskilled labour is entitled to Rs.3,800/- per month and the learned Tribunal ought to have calculated a fair amount towards the monthly income. She submits that the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation and the impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly.
Per contra, Ms. Kirti Pathak, learned advocate for the respondent No.3 – insurance company submits that in absence of any cogent evidence on record, the learned Tribunal has safely considered an amount of Rs.3,000/- as monthly income of the deceased. The said income is adequate and the compensation as calculated thereon is just and proper. She submits that no interference is called for in the impugned judgment and award as no evidence has been brought on record with respect to the income of the deceased. In the circumstances, she submits that the impugned judgment and award be upheld.
Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the evidence on record.
It is admitted that the appellants have only produced 7/12 extract and one tax receipt in support of their case with respect to the income of the deceased. The said evidence by itself will not be sufficient enough to calculate the income as claimed i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- per month. In absence of any cogent evidence on record, this Court is of the opinion that the income should be calculated on the basis of minimum wages applicable to the unskilled worker since the deceased was a farmer. As per the minimum wages applicable, the monthly income would come to Rs.3,800/-. However, looking at the fact that the deceased was in farming and owning land, the monthly income can be safely rounded to Rs.4,000/- per month, adding thereto 30% increase, i.e. Rs.1,200/- per month, the future prospective income can be safely considered at Rs.5,200/- per month. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. [(2009) 6 SCC 121], the multiplier applicable in the present case would be 14, which has been rightly applied by the learned Tribunal.
Accordingly, the appellants herein are entitled to the following compensation:-
Rs. 5,82,456/- Future loss of income.
Rs.5,200/-p.m. x 1/3 dependency loss
= Rs.3,467/-p.m.x12 years x14 multiplier].
Rs. 16,500/- Loss to estate.
Rs. 16,500/- Funeral expenses.
Rs. 1,32,000/- Consortium. [Rs.44,000 x 3 claimants]
Rs. 7,47,456/- Total. i.e. Rs.7,47,500/- in round figure.
In the circumstances, the appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.7,47,500/-. They are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.3,46,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization. The compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal of Rs.4,01,000/- at the rate of 7.5% interest per annum is confirmed. The impugned order stands modified accordingly. The compensation amount be disbursed to the appellants after due verification within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Record & Proceedings of the present case be immediately remitted back to the learned Tribunal for further necessary action.
The present First Appeal is partly allowed and accordingly stands disposed of. No order as to costs.