AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—Admit.
This is a claimants Appeal directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 28.2.2006 passed in MVC No. 6275/2003 on the file of XVI Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate.
By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,84,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation as against the claim made by the appellants for a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased-G N Ranganatha in the road traffic accident.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
Appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are minor children of the deceased Sri G N Ranganatha. They filed a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred on 15.9.2003 at about 2.30 p m. when the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider in the motor cycle of his brother bearing registration No. KA 04 EE/5593, at that time, a lorry bearing registration No. KA 01 AA/5696 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motor cycle, on account of which, the deceased-pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. It is the further case of the appellants that the deceased was aged about 41 years and working as Production Manager in Uma Industries, getting salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month and also Rs. 5,000/- as consultation fee from Growell CNC Systems. On account of untimely death of the deceased, they have lost love and affection, social and financial security and their future life is jeopardised. On account of the death of the deceased. the appellants filed a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- against the respondents. 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. 6,84,000/- with interest at 6% per annual from the date of Petition till realisation. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are in Appeal before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
We have heard learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for No. 1 /Insurance Company.
After careful perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it emerges that it is not in dispute that on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant succumbed to the same. The deceased was aged about 46 years as rightly assessed by the Tribunal. He was working as Production Manager in Uma Industries and getting salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month and working as Production Consultant in Growell CNC System and getting consultation fee of Rs. 5,000/- per month, as referred to above. The Tribunal is not justified in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month and the same is on the lower side. The accident has occurred on 15.9.2003. Having regard to his qualification, nature of work, his age and dependants, who are five in number, We can safely fix the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice. If 1/4 is deducted out of Rs. 7,000/-, the net income comes to Rs. 5,250/- per month. Since the deceased was aged about 46 years, the appropriate multiplier is 13 as per the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, Accordingly, We re-determine compensation payable towards loss of dependency at Rs. 8,19,000/- (Rs. 5,250x12x13) as against Rs. 6,24,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal is justified in awarding just and reasonable compensation of Rs. 60,000/- towards conventional heads. Therefore, it does not call for interference.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the Appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 28.2.2006 passed in MVC No. 6275/2003 on the file of XVI Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 8,79,000/- as against Rs. 6,84,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum of Rs. 1,95,000/-, from the date of Petition till realisation. The break-up is as follows.
(i) Towards loss of dependency Rs. 8,19,000-00 (ii) Towards loss of consortium Rs. 15,000-00 (iii) Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000-00 (iv) Towards loss of love and affection Rs. 15,000-00 (v) Towards funeral & obsequies and Rs. 15,000-00 transportation of dead body Total Rs. 8,79,000-00
Respondent No. 1/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,95,000/- with interest at 6% per annum within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment and award.
Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,95,000/-, a sum of Rs. 75,000/- shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in the names of each of appellant Nos. 3 and 4 till they attain majority, in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank for a period of five years and renewable by another five years. Appellant No. 1 is reserved liberty to withdraw the interest periodically for their welfare.
The remaining sum of Rs. 45,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant No. 1 and 2 immediately on deposit of the amount by the respondent No. 1/Insurance Company.
Office to draw the award, accordingly.