Ramesh and Others vs Nandini Shiva and Others

H. Billappa, J.—1. This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 22.02.2014 passed by the I Additional District Judge and MACT-II, Belgaum, in MVC No. 546/2012.

By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 5,06,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

Aggrieved by that, the appellants-claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement.

Briefly stated the facts are;

The appellants are the parents of the deceased Ujwal Ramesh Ghodageri. On 4.6.2010, the deceased Ujwal Ghodageri along with his friend Sanju was proceeding on Motorcycle bearing No. KA 22-EB/4737 on Dharwad-Hubli bypass road. The deceased Ujwal Ghodageri was riding the motorcycle. When they came near Itigatti Village, at about 2.30 p.m., a Samrat Private Bus bearing Registration No. KA 22/B-2436 came from Hubli side at high speed. While overtaking another vehicle dashed against the motorcycle in which the deceased Ujwal Ghodageri was travelling. The deceased Ujwal Ghodageri and pillion rider died at the spot. The claimants, who are the parents of the deceased Ujwal Ghodageri claimed compensation of Rs. 30,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,06,000/- with 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by that, the appellants-claimants have filed this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month and adopting the multiplier of ''9'' taking the age of the father of the deceased. Further he submitted that the deceased was 4th Semester Diploma Student in Computer Science. He was brilliant and meritorious. While studying itself he used to earn Rs. 6,000/- per month by doing part time service. Further he submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses, transportation charges, loss of love and affection is also inadequate and needs to be enhanced.

As against this, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that the Tribunal on proper consideration of the material on record has awarded just and reasonable compensation and therefore, it does not call for interference. Further he submitted that the petitioners have mentioned the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month in the claim petition. Therefore, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month. Further he submitted future prospects cannot be considered as the matter has been referred to the larger Bench by the Hon''ble Supreme Court. He therefore submitted that the impugned judgment and award does not call for interference.

In reply, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Hon''ble Supreme Court in MUNNA LAL JAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. VIPIN KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS reported in , II (2015) ACC 806 (SC) has considered future prospects. Therefore, future prospects can be considered.

We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

The point that arises for our consideration is; Whether the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified?

It is relevant to note, the deceased Ujwal Ghodageri died in the accident that occurred on 4.6.2010 is not in dispute. The liability of the 2nd respondent Insurance Company is also not in dispute. The deceased was studying in 4th semester Diploma Computer Science. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month and adopting the multiplier of ''9'' based on the age of the father deceased has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,86,000/- towards loss of dependency. The claimants have produced marks cards Exs.P.10 and P.11 which show that the deceased was a Diploma student in Computer Science. The Division Bench of this Court in MFA No. 294/2006 has taken the income of a Diploma Student at Rs. 20,000/- per month. It was contended by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent that in the claim petition, it stated, that the income of the deceased is Rs. 6,000/- per month and therefore, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month. We do not find any merit in this contention, for the reason, in the petition it is stated that the deceased was studying in 4th Semester Computer Science and from a part time service he was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. Therefore, the deceased was not only studying in 4th semester Diploma Computer Science, but also he was earning by doing part time service. In MFA No. 294/2006 this Court has taken the income of the Diploma student at Rs. 20,000/-. Therefore, we consider it proper to take the income of the deceased at Rs. 20,000/- per month. 50% needs to be added towards future prospects. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent Insurance Company contended that the question of future prospects has been referred to larger Bench of the Hon''ble Supreme Court and therefore, future prospects cannot be considered. We do not find any merit in this contention, for the reason, the three Judge Bench of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in MUNNALAL JAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. VIPIN KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS reported in , II (2015) ACC 806 (SC) decided on 15.5.2015 has considered future prospects. Therefore, future prospects can be considered. The age of the deceased was 22 years. Therefore, 50% needs to be added towards future prospects. If 50% is added, the monthly income comes to Rs. 30,000/-. The deceased was a bachelor. Therefore, 50% needs to be deducted towards personal expenses. The balance comes to Rs. 15,000/- Therefore, the loss of dependency per month comes to Rs. 15,000/- The age of the deceased was aged 22 years at the time of the accident. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier is ''18''. The compensation payable towards loss of dependency comes to Rs. 32,40,000/- i.e., (15,000 x 18 x 12). Accordingly, we award a sum of Rs. 32,40,000/- towards loss of dependency.

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of love and affection. The parents have lost their son at a very young age. Therefore, we award Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of love and affection.

The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs. 5000/- towards funeral expenses and transportation charges. It is inadequate. Therefore, we award a sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards funeral expenses and transportation charges.

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of estate does not call for interference.

The compensation payable comes to Rs. 33,25,000/- and the breakup is as follows;

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by the I Additional District Judge and MACT II, Belgaum in MVC No. 546/2012 stands modified enhancing compensation by Rs. 28,19,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation of Rs. 28,19,000/- shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The 2nd respondent Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within 8 weeks.

Out of the enhanced compensation, the appellants 1 and 2 shall be entitled for equal share. 50% of the enhanced compensation shall be invested in fixed deposit any Nationalized Bank for a period three years. The appellants shall be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on it. The balance amount shall be released in favour of the appellants.