AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Sreenivase Gowda
This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Heard. Appeal is admitted with the consent of learned counsel for parties and it is taken up for final disposal.
For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
As there is no dispute regarding death of the deceased Suresh, in a road traffic accident occurred on 02-03-05 due to rash and negligent driving of bus bearing registration No. KA-03-6138 by its driver and liability of the Insurance Co., the only point that remains for my consideration in the appeal is:
Whether quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper or does it call for enhancement?
After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the Judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and proper, it is on the lower side and therefore it is deserved to be enhanced.
Deceased was a bachelor aged about 27 years at the time of his death in the accident. Claim petition is filed by his mother seeking compensation under Sec. 166 of Motor Vehicles Act. Claimant in support of her contention that her deceased son was earning Rs. 4,500/- per month by working in a Courier service Agency has examined herself as P.W.1. In the inquest mahazar marked along with post mortem report as Ex.P.4, the status of the deceased was shown us ''working in French Courier Service''. If that is so, there is no impediment to accept his salary as Rs. 4,500/- per month, as stated by P.W.1.
As he was a bachelor, and claim petition is filed under Sec. 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 50% of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses and remaining 50% has to be taken as his contribution to family.
While drawing inquest mahazar, the statements of the elder sister and elder brother of the deceased were recorded wherein their age is shown as 46 and 42 years respectively. The Tribunal taking the age of the elder sister of the deceased arrived at a conclusion that the claimant was aged about 60 years at the time of death of her son and multiplier applicable to her age group is ''9''. So, loss of dependency works out to Rs. 2,43,000/- (Rs. 4,500/- x 12 x 1/2 x 9) and it is awarded as against Rs. 1,80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under this head.
A sum of Rs. 30,000/- is awarded towards conventional heads as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
Thus claimants are entitled for the following compensation:
1) Lose of dependency
Rs.2,43,000/-
2) Towards conventional heads
Rs.30,000/-
Rs.2,73,000/-
Less compensation awarded by the Tribunal
Rs.1,90,000/-
Additional compensation comes to Rs. 83,000/-
Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimants are entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 83,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date bf realisation. The Insurance Co. is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, from which, Rs. 60,000/- with proportionate interest is ordered to be deposited in FD in the name of the claimant, in any nationalised or scheduled Bank for a period of 4 years, renewable every two years, with a right of option for her to withdraw interest periodically and the remaining amount is ordered to be released in her favour.
No order as to costs.