AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 02.11.2012 passed in MVC No. 106/2012 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-V, Chitradurga, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) seeking to enhance the compensation.
The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded compensation of Rs. 15,00,688/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the realization on account of death of the deceased-L. Umesh in the road traffic accident.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
"The 1st appellant is the wife, 2nd appellant is the minor son of the deceased-L. Umesh and they filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the untimely death of the deceased-L. Umesh in the road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimants that on 20.01.2011 the deceased and one K. Venkatesh were proceeding on the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-15/J-0911 from Chitradurga towards Davanagere. While they were so proceeding on NH-4 near Evergreen Hotel, Chikkabennur, at about 7.15 p.m., the driver of a lorry bearing registration No. TN-04/J-4311 drove it in a rash and negligent manner without giving signal/indicator to cross the road and took a sudden turn on the right side. As a result, truck dashed against the motor cycle. Due to the impact, both fell down and sustained injuries. Immediately, they were shifted to hospital. On the way, the deceased died. On account of the untimely death of deceased, they were constrained to file a claim petition against the respondents claiming compensation. 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 record, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding compensation of Rs. 15,00,688/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization fixing 30% contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle and 70% on the part of the driver of the lorry insured with the insurer. Not being satisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants have presented this appeal seeking to enhance the compensation."
The submission of learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the deceased was working as HC-DG in CRPF and drawing gross salary of Rs. 16,696/-per month. The Tribunal has committed an error in deducting 30% of the income towards income tax. Further, in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , another 50% is liable to be added to the income of the deceased and deducting 1/3rd and applying appropriate multiplier, reasonable compensation be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further, he is quick to point out that the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards conventional heads such as loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection and transportation and funeral expenses. He also submitted that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, atleast 8% to 9% interest per annum may be awarded. Further, he is quick to point out that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court, liberty may be reserved to the appellants to recover 30% of the amount deducted towards contributory negligence from the owner of the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-15/J-0911. Therefore, he submits to enhance the compensation and rate of interest by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1-insurer, inter alia, contended and substantiated that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. After due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal is justified in awarding reasonable compensation. Therefore, he submitted that interference by this Court is not called for. However, after going through the evidence on record, he submitted that the Tribunal has erred in deducting 30% of the income towards income tax and the same may be considered in accordance with law.
After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:
"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"
Occurrence of accident and the resultant death of deceased are not in dispute. Claimants are none other than the wife and minor son of the deceased. Further, it is not in dispute that, the deceased was aged about 40 years. He was working as HC-DG in CRPF, drawing gross salary of Rs. 16,696/- per month. He was the only earning member of the family. On account of his untimely death, the wife has lost her life partner and the son has lost love and affection, guidance, inspiration and security in life. It has also affected social, moral and economic condition of the family. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , we add another 50% of the income towards future prospects. It works out to Rs. 25,044/- per month. Out of which, if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses as the claimants are two in number, the total contribution of the deceased to the family works out to Rs. 16,696/- per month. The deceased was aged about 40 years. Appropriate multiplier is ''15''. Accordingly, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 30,05,280/-(Rs.16,696/- x 12 x 15).
Admittedly, the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 16,696/- per month and per annum it works out to Rs. 2,00,352/-. The said income is not taxable income for the relevant assessment year. Inspite of that, the Tribunal has deducted 30% towards income tax which cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside.
As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to award Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- to each claimant, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses.
As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Following the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, we award 9% interest per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization.
The Tribunal after evaluation of oral and documentary evidence on record, has recorded a specific finding of fact fixing 30% contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-15/J-0911 and 70% on the part of the driver of the lorry bearing registration No. TN-04/J-4311 insured with the insurer-respondent No. 1 herein. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.
In all the appellants/claimants are entitled for a compensation of Rs. 32,55,280/-. Out of which, if 30% is deducted towards contributory negligence, the total compensation comes to Rs. 22,78,696/- as against Rs. 15,00,688/- awarded by the Tribunal. There will be an enhancement of Rs. 7,78,008/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned common judgment and award dated 02.11.2012 passed in MVC No. 106/2012 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-V, Chitradurga, is hereby modified awarding an enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,78,008/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation.
Liberty is reserved to the appellants/claimants to recover remaining 30% of the compensation deducted towards contributory negligence from the owner of the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-15/J-0911 in accordance with law, if so advised and need arises.
The respondent No. 1-M/s. Royal Sundaram alliance insurance company ltd., is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 9% p.a, from the date of petition till the date of realisation within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,78,008/-, Rs. 4,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, in the name of the 1st appellant-Smt. Subhasmi for a period of Fifteen years and renewable for another Ten years, with liberty to her to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.
Rs. 2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of 2nd appellant in Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank till he attains the age of 30 years with liberty reserved to the 1st appellant to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it for his welfare till he attains the age of 21 years and thereafter from 22 years to 30 years, 2nd appellant is entitled to withdraw the interest periodically.
The remaining Rs. 1,78,008/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the 1st appellant, immediately, on deposit by respondent No. 1-insurer.
Office to draw the award, accordingly.