Sankamma and Others vs M.K. Devendrappa and Others

N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 1st September 2010, passed in MVC No. 112/2009, by the Senior Civil Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 6,46,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 19,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimant No. 1 is the wife, claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor children and claimant No. 4 is the mother of deceased M.K. Manjunatha. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 7:45 P.M., on 06-09-2008, when the deceased M.K. Manjunatha was going as the pillion rider on the motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA-16/R-5682, near the Railway gate at Kotehal village in Holalkere Taluk, the rider of the said vehicle rode the same at a high, speed, in a rash and negligent manner and on account of the same the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 35 years and working as agriculturist and also milk vendor, earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the first appellant has lost her life partner, the minor children have lost the love and affection, special guidance, inspiration and the mother has lost the 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 of Rs. 19,00,000/- against the respondents The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 1st September, 2010. 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. 6,46,000/- 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.

I have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for second respondent/Insurer, for quite some time.

Learned counsel appearing for appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal committed an error, in awarding meager compensation for the death of the deceased, resulting in miscarriage of justice, for the reason that, the deceased was aged about 35 years, working as agriculturist and also milk vendor, earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month, but the Tribunal erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at only Rs. 4,500/-. Further, he vehemently submitted that, the deceased was the sole earning member in the family and on account of his untimely and unnatural death, the family is rendered helpless. He further submitted that the compensation awarded towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and liable to be enhanced. Therefore, he submitted that reasonable monthly income may be re-assessed between Rs. 6,500/- and 7,500/- and reasonable enhancement may be made both under loss of dependency as well as conventional heads, by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer, inter alia contended and substantiated the judgment and award passed by Tribunal stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and after consideration of the entire material available on file and hence, the compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for interference.

After hearing learned counsel appearing for the appellants, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer and after careful perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for my consideration in this appeal is:

Whether the compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?

After careful perusal of the entire material available on file, it can be seen that, the claimants are none other than the wife, two minor children and mother of deceased. Occurrence of accident at about 7:45 P.M. on 06-09-2008 and the resultant death of the deceased M.K. Manjunatha are not in dispute. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 35 years, working as agriculturist and also milk vendor, getting income of Rs. 15,000/- per month. But, the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs. 4,500/- per month. The same is on the lower side and needs to be reassessed. Having regard to the age, avocations and the year of accident, I re-assess the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/-, to meet the ends of justice. Out of the said sum, 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased as the claimants are four in number. Accordingly, if 1/4th (i.e. Rs. 1,500/-) is deducted from Rs. 6,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the net income would be Rs. 4,500/- per month. For the age of the deceased being 35 years, the proper multiplier to be adopted is ''16'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) ACJ 1298 : AIR 2009 SC 3104 : (2009) CLT 1055 : (2009) 6 JT 495 : (2009) 6 SCALE 129 : (2009) 6 SCC 121 : (2009) 5 SCR 1098 : (2009) 5 UJ 2280 : (2009) AIRSCW 4992 : (2009) 3 Supreme 487 as rightly adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 8,64,000/- (i.e. Rs. 4,500/- x 12 x ''16'') as against Rs. 5,76,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in awarding a sum of only Rs. 70,000/- towards conventional heads. The same is on the lower side. In the light of the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, I award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate, and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses as against the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads. Thus, the total compensation would work out to Rs. 10,04,000/- as against Rs. 6,46,000/- awarded by Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum, 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 1st September, 2010, passed in MVC No. 112/2009, by the Senior Civil Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 3,58,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal.

The second respondent/Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,58,000/-, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in the name of the Appellant No. 1 - wife of deceased, in any nationalized or scheduled Bank, for a period of fifteen years, renewable for ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest periodically.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in the names of the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 - children of deceased, in any nationalized or scheduled Bank, till the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to appellant No. 1/mother and natural guardian to withdraw the interest for their welfare till they attain the age of 21 years and thereafter from 22 years to 30 years, they are entitled to withdraw their respective interest, periodically.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in the name of the Appellant No. 4 - mother of deceased, in any nationalized or scheduled Bank, for a period of five years, renewable for five years, with liberty reserved, to her to withdraw the interest periodically.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,08,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of Appellant Nos. 1 and 4, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.