Smt. Doddathayamma, Pavan Kumar, Rajeev K. and Smt. Puttabasamma vs K. Sreenivasulu, P. Thirumpathaiah and The Oriental Insurance Company Limited

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants-appellants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 30/12/2010 passed in MVC No. 99/2009, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-III and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysore, (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 15,88,909/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, on account of the death the deceased Sri. Krishnaiah, in the road traffic accident, is inadequate. In brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellant No. 1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the children and appellant No. 4 is the mother of the deceased Sri. Krishnaiah. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 45,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 23.11.2008 at about 7.45 p.m. deceased was proceeding on his TVS moped bearing Reg. No. KA.11.L 4655 at Seshadri Iyer road from RMC Circle side, Mysore, on the left side of the road, at that time, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg. No. AP.02. W.7956 came in a rash and negligent manner from behind and hit against the moped, in which deceased was traveling. Due to which, deceased fell down and front wheel of the lorry ran over his stomach, he sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was taken to K.R.'' Hospital, Mysore, for treatment and the Doctor who examined him declared him as dead.

It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 45 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Lecturer at Lakshmi Hayagreeva PU College, Melkote and drawing the salary of Rs. 19,916/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family and due to his untimely death they suffered both socially and financially, as they have lost their earning member.

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 said claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 15,88,909/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for 3rd respondent-Insurer.

The principal submission of learned counsel Sri. Renukaradhya, appearing for appellants is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and what is awarded is inadequate and it requires to be enhanced. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that, deceased was aged bout 45 years, working as Lecturer in Aided College and drawing the salary of Rs. 19,916/- per month as per Ex. P7-salary certificate. Further, he submits that the appellants are entitled for another 30% towards future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, since he has got a stable job and was aged below 50 years and 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/3rd as done by the Tribunal. Therefore, he submitted that, the judgment and award is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and towards conventional heads.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer, inter alia, contended and substantiated that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. However, after careful perusal of the records available on file, he fairly submitted that 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased since claimants are four in number and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court, another 30% is to be added towards future prospects and therefore, the same may be considered in accordance with law.

After hearing the learned counsel for both 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 proper?

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, deceased was aged about 44 to 45 years and claimants are his wife, children and mother. Further, it is also not in dispute that as on the date of the accident the policy was in force and insurer is liable to indemnify the award amount. Further, it emerges that, deceased was working as Lecturer in an Aided college and drawing the salary of Rs. 19,916/- per month as per Ex. P7, as rightly assessed by the Tribunal and we accept the same. As the deceased was aged about 45 years at the time of his death and he had a permanent job, appellants are entitled for future income of the deceased at 30% of the net income drawn by the deceased as on the date of his death, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case. 30% of Rs. 19.916/- works out to Rs. 5,974.80, which is rounded off to Rs. 5,975/- and if the same is added to Rs. 19,916/-, his total income comes to Rs. 25,891/- per month and per annum it comes to Rs. 3,10,692/-. Out of which, if 30% ( Rs. 93,207/-) towards Income Tax and a sum of Rs. 2,400/- towards professional tax are deducted, the remaining amount comes to Rs. 2,15,085/- per annum. Out of which, if 1/4th ( Rs. 53,771/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, his net annual income comes to Rs. 1,61,314/-. The proper Multiplier applicable is ''14'', since the deceased was aged about 45 years at the time of death as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 22,58,396/-( Rs. 1,61,314/- x 14) instead of Rs. 15,61,409/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, we award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads i.e. towards loss of consortium, towards loss of estate, towards loss of love and affection and towards transportation and funeral expenses instead of Rs. 27,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all, the appellants are entitled for the total compensation of Rs. 23,03,396/- instead of Rs. 15,88,909/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of compensation of Rs. 7,14,487/- with interest at 6% 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 30/12/2010 passed in MVC No. 99/2009, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-III and Motor Accident'' Claims Tribunal, Mysore, is hereby modified, Warding the compensation of Rs. 7,14,487/-, with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The 3rd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,14,487/- with interest at 6% p.a., 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 Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,14,487/-, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 1 in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of ten years and renewable by another ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank in the names of each of the appellant Nos. 2 and 3, till they attain 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically, for their welfare, till they attain 21 years and from 22 years to 30 years they are entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of appellant No. 4, for a period of ten years and renewable by another five years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

The remaining sum of Rs. 1,14,487/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 4 in equal proportion immediately.

Draw the award, accordingly.