Rani Devi vs Mandeep Singh Bedi And Others

Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J

Claimant has preferred the appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded under the provisions of section 166 of M.V. Act, 1988 in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 62 of 2005 for the death of her son Pankaj Kumar in a motor vehicle accident involving truck no. HR -55 /7474.

The Learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,22000/- as compensation with interest @ 6 % to be paid from the date of the order, by accepting the age of the deceased to be 20 years and the monthly income to Rs.3000/- in the year of accident that is 2005 and deducting one third on his personal and living expenses. The claimant is the mother of the deceased and multiplier of 13 was taken as per the age of 45 years by the claimant at the time of the accident.

It is argued that the deceased was the sole earning member of the family and had a monthly income of Rs.10,000/- as per the evidence on record but the Tribunal accepted the income to be Rs.3000/- only. It is also submitted that the compensation has not been awarded as per the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Verma & Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation & Another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.

With regard to the income of the deceased, it has been claimed that he was a motor mechanic. The Tribunal did not accept the evidence of the claimant and her daughter that he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month, as it was not corroborated by any other documentary evidence. At the outset, it must be stated that rule of appreciation of evidence do not warrant blind acceptance of any evidence tendered before the Court. The testimony of any witness is to be tested on the touch stone of probity, natural course of human conduct and overall facts and circumstance of a case. In appreciating evidence on income, the Tribunal is not bound to accept whatever is stated by the witness and has to assess the income considering different background factors which include his age and other evidence on record apart from the evidence of the claimants. I do not find that the Tribunal was in error in assessing the income of the deceased to be Rs.3000/- per month.

Regarding the multiplier to be taken in case of Bachelor, the Tribunal was in error to have computed it on the basis of the age of the claimant. It has been held in Munna Lal Jain v. Vipin Kumar Sharma; (2015) 6 SCC 347 that the determining multiplier will be that of the deceased and not their parents. It was observed,

“ Whether the multiplier should depend on the age of the dependants or that of the deceased, has been hanging fire for sometime; but that has been given a quietus by another three-

Judge Bench decision in Reshma Kumari [Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan, (2013) 9 SCC 65 : (2013) 4 SCC (Civ) 191 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 826 . It was held that the multiplier is to be used with reference to the age of the deceased”

As per the ratio decided in Sarla Verma case (supra) 50% shall be deducted on the personal living expense of the deceased.

Taking Rs.3000/- as the monthly income, 20 years as the age of the deceased the final compensation amount shall work out as per the table given below:

Annual Income Rs3,000x12

Rs 36,000/-

Annual dependency after deducting 50% on the living and personal expenses of the deceased

Rs 18,000/-

Taking multiplier of 18 considering the age of the deceased to be 20 years

Rs 18,000 x 18 = Rs 3,24,000

Future Prospect @ 40%

Rs 1,29,600

Conventional head

Rs 77,000

Total

Rs 5,30,600

The claimants shall therefore be entitled to compensation of Rs.5,30,600/- with interest @ of 7.5% per annum on the compensation amount from the date of filing of claim application from the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company is accordingly directed to make payment of the compensation amount to the Tribunal within a month of this order. It goes without saying that any compensation amount paid to the claimant shall be deducted from the final compensation amount.

The Tribunal shall pay the compensation amount to the claimant after proper identification.

Appeal is allowed as at above.