AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—Though this matter is posted today for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 04/08/2014, passed in MVC No. 2208/2013, by the Member, Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-1), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation.
The Tribunal, by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,31,250/- under different heads after deducting 25% negligence on the part of the deceased, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, as against the claim Rs. 50,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri H. Suresh, in the road traffic accident.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The appellants are the wife, two minor children and mother of the deceased. They along with the father of the deceased have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 18.2.2013 at about 6.30 p.m. deceased was riding motorcycle bearing Reg. No. KA.08.J.9259 from Bangarpet to his village on the left side of the road by observing traffic rules and regulations and when he came near Timmapura gate on NH, Kolar-Bangarpet road, at about 6.30 p.m. the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing Reg. No. KA.07.F.1534 belonging to the respondent came in a rash and negligent manner from opposite direction and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. Due to which, deceased suffered grievous injuries all over his body. Immediately, he was shifted to R.L. Jalappa Hospital, Kolar and the Doctor has declared him brought dead.
It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 38 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and earning Rs. 1,00,000/- per month by doing sericulture, milk vending and bricks business and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. Due to his untimely death, parents have lost their son, wife has lost her husband and minor children are deprived the love and affection, guidance and security of their father and also suffered financial loss as they have lost their bread earner, apart from mental shock and agony.
The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 10,31,250/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization, after deducting 25% towards contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the appellants have presented this appeal.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent-Corporation.
The submission of the learned counsel Sri P.B. Raju, appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 9,000/- per month is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced, on the ground that, deceased was aged about 38 years, sericulturist and also doing milk vending and brick business and therefore, his income may be reassessed reasonably between Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- per month, after deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses and applying multiplier of ''15'', reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further, he submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads and the rate of interest is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court. Further, he submits that the Tribunal has erred in fixing 25% negligence on the part of the deceased and the same is liable to be set aside by fixing entire negligence on the part of the driver of the bus Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.
As against this, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that, the Tribunal taking into consideration the age, occupation and year of the accident has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month, adding 50% of the same towards future prospects, deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 12,15,000/- towards loss of dependency and in fixing 25% negligence on the part of the deceased and that the compensation awarded towards conventional heads is just and reasonable and it does not call for interference.
After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that deceased was aged about 38 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, agriculturist, Sericulturist by profession and also doing milk vending and brick business and the claimants are his wife, children and parents and the only earning member in the family. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, wife has lost her husband, minor children are deprived of the love and affection and guidance and security of their father and parents have lost their son. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 9,000/- per month, which is on the lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Having regard to the age and occupation of the deceased, number of dependants and the year of accident, we re-assess his income at Rs. 10,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice instead of Rs. 9,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if 1/4th ( Rs. 2,500/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased as rightly done by the Tribunal, his net contribution to the family comes to Rs. 7,500/- per month. The appropriate multiplier applicable is ''15'' since deceased was aged about 38 years in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 13,50,000/- ( Rs. 7,500/- x 12 x 15) instead of Rs. 12,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court and this Court, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 1,25,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to the each of the claimant Nos. 1 to 5, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 16,25,000/- instead of Rs. 13,75,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.
Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 6% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2013. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realization on the entire compensation instead of 6% awarded by the Tribunal.
In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 16,25,000/- instead of Rs. 13,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 2,50,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
Regarding contributory negligence is concerned, the Tribunal, after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, after assigning valid reasons at para-16 of its judgment has justified in fixing the contributory negligence at 75% on the part of the driver of the bus and 25% on the part of the deceased who was riding the motor cycle and therefore, interference by this Court is uncalled for.
Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/-, if 25% ( Rs. 62,500/-) is deducted towards contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, the remaining enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 1,87,500/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 04/08/2014, passed in MVC No. 2208/2013, by the Member, Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-1), is hereby modified, awarding additional compensation of Rs. 1,87,500/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization on the entire compensation.
The respondent-Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,87,500/- with interest at 9% p.a. on the entire compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Immediately on such deposit by the respondent-Corporation, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,87,500/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 1, wife of the deceased, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 15 years, renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.
Remaining sum of Rs. 87,500/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant Nos. 1 and 4 in equal proportion.
Draw the award accordingly.