AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellants-claimants is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 28/07/2011 passed in MVC No. 4970/2010, by the Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate. The Tribunal by its judgment and sward has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,65,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, as against the claim of the claimants for a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Veera Reddy, in the road traffic accident.
In brief, the facts of the case are.
The appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor sons of the deceased Sri. Veera Reddy. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 13.7.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. while the deceased was standing on the left side of the foot path with his Hero Honda Splendor Motorbike bearing No. KA. 51.H.6692 near Thimmarayaswamy Weigh Bridge at Anekal-Chandapure Main Road, he was dashed by the driver of BMTC bus bearing Reg. No. KA. 01. FA. 1943 due to rash and negligent driving.
It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 36 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and was self employed and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. Due to his untimely death, appellant No. 1 has lost her husband at her young age and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are deprived of the love and affection, security and guidance of their father and suffered financial distress apart from mental shook 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. 5,65,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.
Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.
Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset submitted that, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month which is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced, for the reason that, deceased was self employed, owning agricultural lands and doing agriculture-sericulture- horticulture and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. But this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Tribunal while assessing the income of the deceased. Further, learned counsel for appellants placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Others, submitted that, another 30% is to be added towards future prospects while determining loss of dependency. Further he submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Therefore, he submitted that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified.
Per contra, learned counsel for Insurer submitted that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.
After hearing the learned counsel for the appellants 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 is not in dispute. The dependants are the wife and minor sons of the deceased. It is the case of the appellants that deceased was aged about 31 years, he was self employed and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and he was also owning agricultural lands and doing horticulture and sericulture. Further, it emerges that, the Tribunal having regard to the age, occupation of the deceased and the year of the accident, has assessed his income at Rs. 4,500/- per month, which is just and reasonable and I accept the same. To that, another 30% is to be added towards future prospects in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Others, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for appellants. If 30% ( Rs. 1,350/-) is added to the monthly income of the deceased towards future prospects, his total monthly income comes to Rs. 5,850/- ( Rs. 4,500/- + Rs. 1,350/-). Out of which, if 1/3rd ( Rs. 1,950/-) is deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased since there arc three dependants, his net income comes to Rs. 3,900/- per month. Accepting the Multiplier of ''15'' adopted by the Tribunal, taking the age of the deceased as ''36'' years on the basis of Ex. P9 as just and proper, I re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 7 02,000/- ( Rs. 3,900/- x 12 x 15) instead of Rs. 5,40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads, such as, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, loss of estate and transportation and funeral expenses instead of Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 7,47,000/- instead of Rs. 5,65,000/-. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 1,82,000/- 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 and the impugned judgment and award dated 28/07/2011 passed in MVC No. 4970/2010, by the Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 1,82,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,82,000/- 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 deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,82,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of appellant No. 1, 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. 50,000/- 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 22 years and thereafter, from 23 years to 30 years, appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to withdraw the interest, periodically.
The remaining sum of Rs. 32,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant No. 1 immediately.
Draw the award, accordingly.