Surekha and Others vs The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd.

S. Sujatha, J.—The claimants are before this Court challenging the judgment and award passed by the MACT, Belgaum in MVC No. 334/2010.

The brief facts of the case are

That on 27.09.2009, the deceased by name Dundappa Jyotiba Ghabade and other had been to Yallamma Gudda to take Devi darashana of Yallamma Devi in their friend''s vehicle TempoTrax Cruiser bearing registration No. MH-12/CR-2575. When they were returning from Yallmma Guda towards Dundagi in the said vehicle, the driver of the vehicle drove the same in rash and negligent manner without following the traffic rules and lost control over the said vehicle and collided to the divider of NH-4 and caused the accident. As a result, Dundappa Jyotiba Ghabade and others sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to KLE Hospital for treatment. During his treatment, he died at about 2.30 a.m. on very next day i.e., on 28.09.2009.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the claimants have spent more than Rs. 25,000/- towards medical treatment and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation. The deceased was self employed, he had transportation business and he was the owner of the goods vehicle No. MH-09/Z-34432 which has been attached to Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Kolhapur for collection of milk on a monthly basis from the last five years and thereby he used to earn Rs. 30,000/- p.a. from the same. Apart from this, the deceased owned agricultural lands at Dundagi and he used to earn Rs. 1,00,000/- p.a. The deceased was the only earning member of the entire family. The wife, children and aged parents were depending on the income of the deceased who was aged 35 years at the time of the accident. Though adequate evidence was produced before the Tribunal i.e., Ex. P8, the certificate issued by Kolhapur Milk producers Society and Ex. P9 to P12 which consists of 63 bills pertaining to milk procurement bills from 01.06.2006 to 30.09.2009, Tribunal has considered the bill from 01.09.2009 to 15.09.2009 and determined the income of Rs. 54,000/- p.a. As per the bills produced and the Bank statement, Rs. 11,50,171/- was the amount paid by Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., to the deceased for the three years. If the same is taken on the average basis, the monthly income of the deceased would be easily determined at Rs. 12,000/- per month. The Tribunal without appreciating the clinching evidence which was available on record, determined the monthly income at Rs. 4,500/- per month as the income of the deceased. The Tribunal has also awarded a paltry sum under the different conventional heads, which necessarily requires interference by this Court.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurance company justifies the judgment passed by the Tribunal and contended that the Ex. P9 to Ex. P12 consisting of 63 bills pertaining to milk procurement bills does not give the entire picture to determine the actual monthly income of the deceased. Accordingly, the Tribunal noticing that there was variation in these bills from time to time which would not be a basis to determine the income of the deceased, has assessed the notional income of deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month which cannot be found fault with. Even on the other conventional heads, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has awarded adequate compensation, which cannot call for any interference by this Court.

Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, I have gone through the Ex. P. 9 to Ex. P. 12 63 bills pertaining to milk procurement bills along with bank statement which specifies that the amount of Rs. 11,50,171/- was credited to the account of the deceased for a period of three years. Though there may be variations in the monthly bills, only on that ground the bills and the bank statements produced by the claimants cannot be brushed aside to negate the contention of the claimants regarding the income of the deceased at Rs. 12,000/- per month. Even assuming that there may be variations from month to month, the appropriate income has to be taken to determine the monthly income. If the same is taken and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kala Devi Vs. Bhagwan Das Chauhan, '' and in the case of Rajesh and Others Vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, , this Court can safely determine the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 10,000/- per month.

It is noticed that the deceased was aged about 36 years at the time of the accident. The wife, minor children and aged parents were depending on the sole bread earner who was self employed owning a vehicle attached to the Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., and the amount was directly credited to the bank account of the deceased. If the same is verified and taken into consideration, the deceased had good future prospects and he had the responsibility to take care of the entire family who are all dependant on him. In such circumstances, by following the judgment of ''Munna Lal Jain and Another Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Others'' passed in ''Civil Appeal No. 4497 of 2015'', this Court can award the compensation towards future prospects at 30%. Therefore, loss of dependency works out to Rs. 17,55,000/- after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased.

The compensation awarded on other conventional heads are just and proper. Hence, the claimants are entitled for the enhanced compensation of Rs. 11,47,500/-.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified. The respondent-insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest @ 8% p.a. within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment. Out of the enhanced compensation, 50% shall be deposited in favour of minor children in any nationalised Bank till they attain majority. The claimants are at liberty to withdraw the remaining 50% of the enhanced compensation.