Swetha and Others vs Sai Concrete Equipment and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 06/10/2012, passed in MVC No. 8960/2010, by the XII Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 8,21,940/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, as against the claim of Rs. 75,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased Sri. N. Kumar, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellants are the wife, minor daughter and parents of the deceased. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 16.8.2010 at about 8.00 p.m. one Mr. Selvam being the driver of a Concrete Mixer lorry bearing Reg. No. KA.01.C4420 drove the same on Bangalore-Kolar NH4 high way road in a direction from Bhattarahalli to Bidarahlli with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and near Medahalli fly over, he over took a motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.03.EQ.5652 which was going ahead of the said lorry and in doing so, he dashed his lorry against the said motorcycle. As a result, both rider and pillion rider fell down on the road, whereby the left rear wheel of the lorry ran over the right leg of the pillion rider and thereby he sustained fatal injuries. Immediately, the pillion rider i.e. deceased was taken to near by Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Bangalore, for treatment and after first aid, he was shifted to Manipal Hospital, Bangalore, for better treatment. However, on 18.8.2010, at about 1.45 p.m. he succumbed to the injuries while under treatment in the said hospital." 3. It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 27 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and was doing sand business and transportation of vegetables and was also doing agricultural work in his family lands and thereby earning Rs. 50,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. Due to his untimely death, appellants have suffered financial loss as they have lost their bread earner, apart from mental shock and agony.

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 file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 8,21,940/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the deceased reasonably since the accident is of the year 2010 and he was aged about 27 years, agriculturist and also doing own business in sand and transportation by owning two vehicles and succumbed to the injuries sustained by him in the accident inspite of giving best treatment. Therefore, he submitted that the income of the deceased may be reassessed reasonably and award the compensation towards loss of dependency after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses and applying multiplier of ''17''. Further, he submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads and also the rate of interest awarded at 6% p.a., is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. Further, he submitted that the Tribunal has justified in deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased since the father is not depending on the deceased.

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

"Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?" 10. The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that deceased was aged about 27 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and the dependants are his wife, minor daughter and parents. It is the case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 27 years, doing agricultural work in the lands and also doing sand and transportation business by owning two vehicles and earning Rs. 50,000/- per month and the only earning member in the family. But they have not produced any documents to prove he same. It is the further case of the appellants that, on account of the death of the deceased, the appellant No. 1 has lost her husband at her young age, appellant No. 2 is deprived of the love and affection, guidance and security of her father and the appellant Nos. 3 and 4 have lost their son who was their future hope and security and the same has to be compensated reasonably. We find some substance in the said submission. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month, which is on the lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Having regard to the age and occupation of the deceased and the year of accident, we re-assess his income at Rs. 6,500/- per month instead of Rs. 5,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if 1/4th ( Rs. 1,625/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, his net income comes to Rs. 4,875/- per month. The proper multiplier applicable is ''17'' since deceased was aged about 27 years as rightly adopted by the Tribunal and we accept the same. Therefore, we redetermine the loss of dependency at Rs. 9,94,500/- ( Rs. 4,875/- x 12 x 17) instead of Rs. 6,80,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- to the each of the appellants, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses instead of Rs. 40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

However, a sum of Rs. 1,16,940/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses as per the medical bills produced by the appellants is just and reasonable and interference by this Court is not called for. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 13,01,440/- instead of Rs. 8,21,940/- awarded by the Tribunal There would be an enhancement of Rs. 4,79,500/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

Regarding rate of interest is concerned, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 6% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2010. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation instead of 6% awarded by the Tribunal.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 06/10/2012, passed in MVC No. 8960/2010, by the XII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,79,500/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,79,500/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Immediately on deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,79,500/-, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit, in the name of the appellant No. 1, in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of 15 years and renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit, in the name of the appellant No. 4, mother of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of 05 years and renewable by another 05 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 4 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

A sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit, in the name of appellant No. 2, in any Nationalized or Scheduled bank, till she attains 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically, for the welfare of appellant No. 2 till she attains 21 years and thereafter, from 22 years to 30 years, she is at liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

The remaining sum of Rs. 79,500/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4, in equal proportion immediately.

Draw the award, accordingly.