AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal seeking enhancement of compensation is directed
against the judgment & award dated 12.06.2000 passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Jodhpur (''the Tribunal''), whereby the
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,28,000/- as compensation.
The application for compensation was filed by the appellants -
wife, children and parents of the deceased Umeda Ram, inter alia,
with the averments that the deceased was aged 23 years at the time
of accident, he was earning Rs.2,500/- per month and was getting an
allowance of Rs.50/- per day. Based on the said averments, the
compensation of Rs.16,26,000/- was claimed.
The application was contested by the Owner and the Insurance
Company.
The Tribunal after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion
that the deceased was aged 23 years and as no certificate pertaining
to the salary was produced, keeping in view the fact that the
deceased was a co-driver in the vehicle, his income alongwith the
future enhancement was taken at Rs.2,500/- per month, after
deducting 40% towards personal expenses, the dependency was
taken at Rs.1,500/- per month and after applying multiplier of 17, a
sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards loss of income was awarded. Further,
Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of
consortium and Rs.4,000/- each to children and parents of the
deceased towards loss of love and affection was awarded. The
Tribunal further awarded interest @ 12% per annum from the date of
application i.e. 19.02.1997.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the
Tribunal committed error in awarding the meager compensation to
the appellants. It was submitted that the evidence, which came on
record clearly indicated that the deceased was having income of
Rs.2,500/- per month alongwith allowance of Rs.50/- per day and
that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the future
prospects of the deceased; further the deduction of 40% is excessive,
the multiplier adopted is incorrect, the award of amount under the
heads of loss of consortium and loss of love & affection is too low and
the same, therefore, deserves to be enhanced.
Reliance was placed on judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court in
the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation : (2009) 6
SCC 121.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company
supported the award impugned. It was submitted that no evidence
was produced by the claimants proving the income of the deceased
as claimed by them, the amount of daily allowance cannot be taken
into consideration and that the award of future prospects for self-
employed person is not admissible even as per the judgment in the
case of Sarla Verma (supra) relied on by the counsel for the
appellants.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties and have perused the material available on record.
On behalf of the claimants, two witnesses PW-1 - Smt. Meema
Devi and PW-2 - Banshilal were examined. Both the witnesses
claimed the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500 per month. However,
the fact that the deceased was in fact in receipt of the income as
claimed, was not established by any specific documentary evidence,
even the certificate from the employer in this regard was not
produced. Banshilal, Driver of the Truck, which met with the accident
claimed that the deceased was second driver, he used to get
Rs.3,000/- per month & expenses and the deceased Umeda Ram
used to get Rs.2,500/- per month & expenses.
From the material available on record as noticed hereinbefore
except for the oral evidence of the two witnesses, no material was
produced. The minimum wages of the skilled labour in the year 1996
was Rs.884/- per month. In view thereof, the assessment of income
of the deceased as a co-driver of the vehicle made by the Tribunal
keeping in view his future prospects also at Rs.2,500/- appears to be
just and proper in the circumstances of the case and does not call for
any interference.
However, deduction for personal expenses and the multiplier
applied by the Tribunal is apparently contrary to the law laid down by
Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (surpa) and,
therefore, the same deserves to be modified.
Consequently, for loss of income, the claimants would be
entitled to the amount as under:-
Rs.2,500 - 625 (1/4th towards personal expenses) = Rs.1875 X
12 X 18 = Rs.4,05,000/-.
The submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants-
claimants that the award of compensation under the head of funeral
expenses as well as loss of consortium and love & affection is on the
lower side are justified and as such, the said amount of compensation
is enhanced to Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.25,000/-
towards loss of consortium Rs.10,000/- each for loss of love &
affection to the children and parents of the deceased.
In view of the above, the claimants would now be entitled to a
compensation of Rs.4,75,000/- instead of Rs.3,28,000/- as awarded
by the Tribunal. The claimants would also be entitled for interest @
8% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the
date of application i.e. 19.02.1997.
Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,47,000/-, a sum of
Rs.1,20,000/- alongwith interest be paid to the appellant No.1 - Smt.
Meema Devi in her Saving Bank Account and the rest amount of
Rs.27,000/- alongwith the interest be paid to Smt. Lichhami Devi,
mother of the deceased in her Saving Bank Account.
Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellants is partly
allowed. The impugned award dated 12.06.2000 passed by the
Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellants would be
entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,75,000/- instead of Rs.3,28,000/-
alongwith interest @ 8% per annum on the amount of enhanced
compensation from the date of application i.e. 19.02.1997.
The amount be paid as directed hereinbefore to the claimants
within a period of six weeks from the date of this judgment.
Office is directed to sent back the record to the Tribunal
immediately.