AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 6th May 2009, passed in MVC No. 1580/2004, by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and CJM and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandya, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement. of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 4,25,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 10,00,000/-, 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 Kempaiah. They filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 8:30 P.M., on 08-08-2004, when the deceased was standing on the left side of the road, he met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Car bearing Registration No. KA-04/A-7656, on M.C. Road in front of Abhinava Bharathi School at Halebudanur Village. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he succumbed to injuries.
It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 35 years and an Agriculturist by profession, earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month and was 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, inspiration and guidance and the mother has lost the social and moral support, apart from financial 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 against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 6th May, 2009. 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. 4,25,000/- 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 appellants and also the Insurer, for quite sometime.
After hearing learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Insurer, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, I am of the view that the Tribunal has erred in not assessing reasonable income of the deceased. The deceased was aged about 35 years and an Agriculturist by profession, earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month. But, the Tribunal has disbelieved the same on the ground that the appellants have not produced any documents in support of the same and assessed the income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. The same is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed. The accident is of the year 2004. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation, number of dependents and also the year of accident, I am of the view that the said income stated by the appellants may be a bit exaggeration and accordingly, I re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,500/- per month, to meet the ends of justice.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for appellants drew my attention to the latest decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others (Civil Appeal No. 3723/2012, arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 24489/2010), wherein, at paragraph 14, the Apex Court has held after referring to Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, and other relevant judgments, that ''Rather, it would be reasonable to say that a person who is self-employed or is engaged on fixed wages will also get 30% increase in his total income over a period of time and if he/she becomes victim of accident then the same formula deserves to be applied for calculating the amount of compensation.'' Further, the Hon''ble Apex Court has categorically observed that "In our view, it will be naive to say that the wages or total emoluments/income of a person who is self-employed or who is employed on a fixed salary without provision for annual increment etc. would remain the same through out his life. The rise in the cost of living affects everyone across the board. It does not make any distinction between rich and poor....."
In the case on hand, admittedly, the deceased was an agriculturist by profession. I have re-assessed the monthly income at Rs. 3,500/-, to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and others (supra), I add 30% to the monthly income of the deceased, towards future prospects. Accordingly, the total monthly income would be Rs. 4,550/- ( Rs. 3,500/- + Rs. 1,050/-). As the deceased was aged about 35 years, the proper multiplier applicable is ''16'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, as against ''15'' adopted by Tribunal. As the number of dependents are four, I deduct 1/4th (i.e. Rs. 1,137./-) towards the personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, if 1/4th (i.e. Rs. 1,137/-) is deducted from Rs. 4,550/- towards his personal expenses, the net income would be Rs. 3,413/- per month. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs. 6,55,296/- (i.e. Rs. 3,413/- x 12 x''16'') as against Rs. 3,60,000/- awarded by Tribunal.
Further, the Tribunal has erred in awarding a sum of Rs. 65,000/- towards conventional heads. The same is on the higher side. As per the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case (supra), I award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads, such as loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection and transportation and funeral expenses as against Rs. 65,000/- awarded by Tribunal.
Thus, the total compensation would come to Rs. 7,00,296/- as against Rs. 4,25,000/- awarded by Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. There would be enhancement of compensation by Rs. 2,75,296/-.
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 6th May 2009, passed in MVC No. 1580/2004, by. the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) & CJM and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandya, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 2,75,296/-, 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. 2,75,296/-, 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. 75,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the name of the first appellant-wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by another ten years, with liberty reserved to her. to withdraw the periodical interest.
A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the name of the fourth appellant-mother of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, for a period of five years, renewable by another three years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.
A sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the names of each of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 - minor children of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, till they attain the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 1 to withdraw the periodical interest, on their behalf till they attain the age of 21 years and thereafter they are entitled to withdraw their respective periodical interest.
Remaining sum of Rs. 50,296/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 4, in equal proportion, immediately.
Office to draw award, accordingly.