Savitha and Others vs Prakash H.S. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 21/08/2011, passed in MVC No. 865/2009, by the District Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, I Fast Track Court, Shimoga, (hereinafter referred to as '' Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 4,51,052/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its payment, as against the claim of Rs. 20,50,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. M.S. Bhaskara, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellants are the wife and children of the deceased. They 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 11.6.2009, deceased had been to attend the marriage reception function. After finishing the function, he along with one Ramaswamy was returning home by walk on Javagal Shiruru road and when they came near the house of Virupaksha Bhatta, at about 10 a.m. the driver of the goods auto bearing Reg. No. KA.14.A.4051 came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to the deceased and caused the accident. Due to which, deceased sustained grievous injuries to the head and he died at J.C. Hospital, Thirthahalli."

It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 48 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, Agricultural Produce Merchant and also an agriculturist by profession and getting Rs. 15,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. Due to his untimely death, appellants have 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. 4,51,052/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till payment.

Being dis- satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal. During the pendency of this appeal, appellant No. 1, wife of the deceased died and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are treated as her LRs.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the deceased reasonably and what is assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 4,000/- per month is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that, deceased was aged about 48 years, Agricultural Produce Merchant and an agriculturist by profession and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month, only earning member in the family and the entire family was depending on his income. Therefore, he submitted that the income of the deceased may be re-assessed reasonably, after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal and living expenses and adopting ''13'' multiplier, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further, he submits that, compensation awarded towards conventional heads by the Tribunal 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. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by enhancing reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and towards conventional heads.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, 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.

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. It is case of the appellants that deceased was aged about 48 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, Agricultural Produce Merchant and an agriculturist by profession, only earning member in the family and entire family was depending on his income and on account of the untimely death of the deceased, wife has lost her companion and children are deprived of the love and affection, guidance and inspiration of their father. Having regard to the age, occupation of the deceased, year of the accident and the number of dependants, we re-assess his income at Rs. 5,500/- per month instead of Rs. 4,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal to meet the ends of justice. Out of which, if 1/3rd ( Rs. 1,833/-) 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. 3,667/- per month. The proper multiplier applicable is ''13'' since deceased was aged about 48 years as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 5,72,052/- ( Rs. 3,667/- x 12 x 13) instead of Rs. 4,16,052/- as awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court, we award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of consortium Rs. 75,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- to each of the appellant Nos. 1 to 3, 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. 7,47,052/- instead of Rs. 4,51,052/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 2,96,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization excluding interest for the delayed period of 726 days in filing the appeal.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 21/08/2011, passed in MVC No. 865/2009, by the District Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, I Fast Track Court, Shimoga, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 2,96,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization excluding interest for the delayed period of 726 days in filing the appeal, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,96,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization excluding interest for the delayed period of 726 days in filing the appeal, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for appellants submitted that, appellant No. 2 may be appointed as guardian of appellant No. 3, because she is a handicapped and unsound mind person, to enable him to withdraw the interest accrued on the amount deposited in her name in the bank for her welfare.

Placing the said submission on record, appellant No. 2 is appointed as the guardian of the appellant No. 3, so far as it relates to withdrawing the interest accrued on the amount deposited in her name in the Bank for her welfare.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,96,000/-, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 3, daughter of the deceased, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years, renewable by another 05 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 2 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically, for the welfare of the appellant No. 3.

A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 2, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 05 years and renewable by another 05 years, with liberty reserved to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

Remaining sum of Rs. 96,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant No. 2 immediately.