Smt. Chandra Jadhv and Others vs Rameshwar Kumar Panigrahi and others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—This is claimants appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur (''for short the Tribunal'') vide award dated 13.01.2010, passed in Claim Case No. 309/2007. As against the compensation of Rs. 10,94,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and minor daughters of deceased Suresh Jadhav, by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. For his death in the motor accident on 23.10.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,21,960/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum in the event of the insurer''s failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the award.

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Suresh Jadhav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 23.10.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G. - 04J/2185; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

As the respondents have not filed any appeal challenging the above findings recorded by Tribunal, the same now have attained finality.

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,000/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs. 4,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 2,680/- per month and Rs. 31,920/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 31,920/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 4,14,960/-. By awarding further sum of Rs. 7,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,21,960/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Suresh Jadhav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 4,21,960/- @ 6% per annum in the event of insurer''s failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the award.

Shri Keshav Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants'' overwhelming evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 4,000/- per month only, in selecting the lower multiplier of 13; in awarding only Rs. 7,000/- under other heads; in awarding only Rs. 4,21,960/- as compensation; and in directing only conditional payment of interest in the event of the insurer''s failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the award.

Shri A.K. Athaley, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs. 4,21,960/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

Deceased Suresh Jadhav was aged about 45 years on the date of the accident. He was a driver by occupation and used to drive a ten-wheel truck. The claimants in their claim petition categorically pleaded that deceased Suresh Jadhav used to get Rs. 4,500/- per month as salary from the owner of the Truck Respondent No. 2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar, owner of the Truck in her written statement filed before the Tribunal admitted that a sum of Rs. 4,500/- per month was being paid as salary to deceased Suresh Jadhav. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined AW2 Rajesh Kumar, a co-driver of the deceased also in the employment of respondent No. 2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar and he too categorically stated that deceased Suresh Jadhav was getting Rs. 4,500/- per month as salary. Nothing material could be elicited by the respondents in his cross examination. In fact, NAW1 Ramdas Ishwar, husband of respondent No. 2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar, owner of the Truck and employer of deceased Suresh Jadhav also stated in his deposition before the Tribunal that deceased Suresh Jadhav was getting Rs. 4,500/- per month as salary.

In our considered opinion, the Tribunal has erred in ignoring the above mentioned overwhelming evidence of the claimants above the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 4,000/- per month only. The Tribunal, in our opinion, ought to have assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month and Rs. 54,000/- per annum. We, therefore, propose to recomputed the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month and Rs. 54,000/- per annum.

By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs. 54,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency is assessed at Rs. 36,000/- per annum.

The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal is also on the lower side in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, wherein multiplier of 14 has been prescribed for the age group between 41-45 years. In our opinion multiplier of 14, therefore, would be appropriate in the present case.

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 36,000/- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs. 5,04,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 5,19,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Suresh Dadhav in the motor accident.

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.

Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal; the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, the fact that the Tribunal by directing only conditional payment of interest in the event of the insurer''s failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the award has deprived the claimants of the amount of interest to which they were otherwise entitled; further the fact that the insurance company in fact deposited the amount of compensation before the Tribunal on 22.02.2010 i.e. within two months of the passing of the award and as such did not pay even a single rupee towards interest on the awarded amount, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation and the amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs. 22,960/-

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 4,21,960/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 5,19,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 22,960/-.

Respondent No. 3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months'' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- (rupees one lakh twenty thousand only) (Rs. 97,040/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 22,960/- towards quantified amount of interest) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs.