Smt. Rathi Devi vs M/s. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. and Others

Rathnakala, J.—This appeal is filed challenging the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-4, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as ''the Tribunal'' for brevity) vide its judgment and award dated 17.12.2012 in MVC No. 8639/2010. The appellant herein filed claim petition u/s 166 of MV Act, seeking compensation of rupees one crore on the death of her husband Narayan L. Kulkarni in a road traffic accident that occurred on 11.11.210 at about 2.40 p.m., at Nice road, Bangalore. The case of the appellant was, that on 11.11.2010, at 2.40 p.m., when the deceased was travelling in Wagon R Car bearing registration No. KA 05 MC 8790 from Mylasandra Kengeri from his house to Bannerghatta road, Bangalore, at Nice Road, by observing traffic rules and regulations, the offending Verna Car bearing registration No. KA 05 MG 7520, driven by its driver - M. Sandesh, rashly and negligently, crossed the median and landed on the Maruthi Wagon R Car resulting in spot death of Narayan S. Kulkarni. The deceased was hale and healthy; a flourishing businessman aged 47 years, was earning more than Rs. 8,000/- p.m. and contributing his entire income for the petitioner. The petitioner at the middle of her age is put to loss and suffering and mental pain.

The petition was contested by all the three respondents. Inter alia it was brought on record that the vehicle was insured with the first respondent at the time of accident. The Tribunal on hearing both parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence awarded compensation of Rs. 17,19,948/- with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of petition with a direction to the Insurance Company to deposit the amount.

Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that though there was sufficient material on record about the earnings of the deceased i.e., more than Rs. 80,000/- p.m., the Tribunal by ignoring the same has taken the notional income as Rs. 25,000/- p.m. He was an income tax assessee; for the year 2007 - 2008 his income was more than Rs. 5,70,000/- p.a. The Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd of his income towards personal expenditure while calculating loss of dependency. This has resulted in miscarriage of justice to the appellant and hence, requests for modification of Award by enhancement of the compensation amount.

In reply, Sri. O. Mahesh, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent - Insurance Company substantiates the Award and submits that the Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence placed before it, having regard to all the surrounding circumstances, has worked out the loss of dependency on the basis of the notional income of Rs. 25,000/- per month and the amount awarded is just and reasonable and the appeal is liable to be rejected.

After hearing learned Advocates for both parties and on perusal of impugned Judgment and Award, the following point arise for our consideration:--

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?

It is not disputed that the appellant herein is the wife of deceased Narayan L. Kulkarni and so also his sole legal heir; the deceased was a entrepreneur with a pretty good business in his hands; as on the date of the death he was aged 47 years and was hale and healthy. In view of the rash and negligent driving of Verna Car bearing registration No. KA 05 MG 7520 insured by the first respondent - Insurance Company, he breathed his last at 2.40 p.m. on 11.11.2010 at Nice road. In respect of the income of her deceased husband, the petitioner had produced documents Exs. P9, P12 and P15/the income tax returns acknowledgments. The deceased had declared his income as Rs. 3,04,499/- for the year 2009 - 10, Rs. 2,86,710/- for the year 2008 - 09 and Rs. 4,61,029/- for the year 2010-11. These returns reflect that the income of deceased was not stable and varies from year to year. That prompted the Tribunal to presume the average annual income less tax as Rs. 3,00,000/- p.a./Rs. 25,000/- p.m.

Having regard to the date of incident and avocation of the deceased, we infer that ends of justice will be better served if the income of the deceased is taken as Rs. 30,000/- per month as against Rs. 25,000/- p.m., taken by the Tribunal. Since it was a family of two members, 50% of the income of the deceased shall be deducted towards his personal expenditure; the deceased was aged 47 years and the appropriate multiplier to work out the loss of dependency is ''13'' as per the judgment of Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, . Multiplying the annual income with the multiplier ''13'', works out to Rs. 23,40,000/- (Rs. 15,000/- x 12 x 13). That equates with the loss of dependency. Having regard to the fact that the appellant at the prime of her life has lost the company, society,, love and affection of her husband, we deem it fit to award Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs. 10,000/- loss of estate Rs. 10,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses that brings the total compensation to Rs. 24,20,000/- as against Rs. 17,19,948/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus there will be enhancement of Rs. 7,00,092/-, which will be rounded of by Rs. 7,00,100/-. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 17.12.2012 in MVC No. 8639/2010 passed by the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-4, Bangalore is modified by awarding enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,00,100/- with 6% interest p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of recovery.

The first respondent - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within 3 weeks from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and award.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,00,100/-, a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- with proportionate interest in the name of the appellant, shall be invested in F.D. in any nationalised or scheduled bank of her choice, for a period of 10 years, renewable for another 10 years, with liberty to withdraw the interest periodically and remaining Rs. 1,00,100/- along with interest portion on enhanced compensation shall be released in favour of the appellant/claimant.