Rathnamma and Others vs M. Selvaraj and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—Though this matter is posted for orders, the same is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 2nd August 2013, passed in MVC No. 5190/2011, by the VI Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-2), (for short, Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 7,73,100/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 25,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the wife, two major children and mother of the deceased N. Subramani. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 5:30 P.M, on 07-07-2011, when the deceased was proceeding in TVS-50 Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. TN-29/W-8723 slowly and cautiously from Attipalli towards his village, after crossing Zuzuwadi Lake near Tirumala Company, the driver of Mini Lorry bearing Registration No. KA-05/B-1156 came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, so as to endanger human life, dashed against the vehicle of the deceased from opposite direction. Due to the impact, the deceased suffered severe injuries and died on the spot.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 55 years, doing agriculture work in the four acres of land owned by him, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants have lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance, apart from social, financial and moral support and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.

On account of the death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 2nd August, 2013. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 7,73,100/- under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

We have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and also the Insurer, for quite some time.

Learned counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in taking the income of the deceased at only Rs. 6,000/- per month. He submits that the deceased was aged about 50 years and doing agricultural operation, cattle trading and real estate business and earning substantial sum and contributing the entire sum to the welfare of the family. But, disbelieving the same, the Tribunal, without any basis has assessed the income of the deceased at only Rs. 6,000/- per month. The same is liable to be reassessed. Therefore, he submitted that, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency, by adopting proper multiplier and deducting 1/4th towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. He further submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and therefore, the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency as also conventional heads.

Further, learned counsel appearing for claimants vehemently submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred on 07-07-2011. In view of the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, at least 8% to 10% interest per annum may be awarded in the instant case, to meet the ends of justice and the impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer vehemently submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal is after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also taking into consideration the age, avocation and also the year of accident etc. Therefore, interference in the same is not called for. However, he fairly submitted that reasonable enhancement may be made towards conventional heads, as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for our consideration in this appeal is,

"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

The undisputed facts of the case are, the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased N. Subramani. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 50 years. But, the Tribunal, after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, particularly Ex. P3, the Post Mortem Report, has assessed the age of the deceased as 55 years. The same being just and proper, we accept it. It is stated that he was doing agricultural operation, cattle trading and real estate business and owned four acres of land and also earning substantial sum. But, it should be seen that the income from the agricultural land continues to be there even in the absence of the deceased, but there will be some loss of supervisory charges. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,900/- per month. The same is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court as the accident is of the year 2011 and the deceased was aged about 55 years. Further, considering the number of dependents, deducting 1/4th towards the personal expenses of the deceased and adopting the multiplier of 11, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 6,83,100/- (i.e. Rs. 5,175/- x 12 x ''11'') towards loss of dependency. The same is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.

However, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. In the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium as against Rs. 20,000/-; Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate as Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under this head, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each claimant as against Rs. 60,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs. 9,33,100/- as against Rs. 7,73,100/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/-.

As rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for claimants, the rate of interest at 6% per annum awarded by Tribunal is also on the lower side, as the accident has occurred on 07-07-2011. Therefore, as per the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper to award rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd August 2013, passed in MVC No. 5190/2011, by the VI Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-2), is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 9,33,100/- as against Rs. 7,73,100/- awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The Respondent No. 2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of first appellant -wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by five years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 60,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 4, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.