Swetha vs Akram

N.K. Patil, J. - This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 4th May 2012, passed in MVC No. 45/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjanagudu, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs.5,19,550/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs.29,40,000/-, is inadequate.

The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the wife, minor daughter and parents of the deceased Krishna. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 9:00 p.m, on 28th May, 2011, when the deceased Krishna was riding pillion in the motor bike bearing Registration No. KA-09/EM-6988, ridden by one Lokesh, on Mysuru-Nanjangud Road, near Tandavapura Holi Church, on the extreme left side of the road, they met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Lorry bearing Registration No. KA-01/4886. As result of the same, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and was immediately shifted to Hospital. But, unfortunately, he died on 30th May, 2011, after three days on account of the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, as the treatment did not yield any result.

It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 25 years, an agriculturist and also Coolie, earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants have lost the sole earning member in the family and the entire family was dependent on his income and apart from that, they have lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance, other than social, financial and moral support and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.

On account of the untimely and unnatural death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 4th May, 2012. 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.5,19,550/- under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. 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 gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned Counsel appearing for appellants and also the learned Counsel appearing for third respondent/Insurer, for quite some time.

Shri. P.G. Yatnal, appearing for Shri. D. Krishna Moorthy, learned Counsel appearing for claimants/appellants vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased at only Rs.3,000/- per month. He submits that the deceased was aged about 25 years, working as an agriculturist and also Coolie, earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month. But, disbelieving the same, the Tribunal, without any basis has assessed the income of the deceased at only Rs.3,000/- per month. The same is liable to be re-assessed at least between Rs.6,500/- and Rs.7,000/- per month. Therefore, he submitted that, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency, by adopting proper multiplier of ''18'' and deducting l/4th towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, as the claimants are four in number. He further submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and therefore, the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency as also conventional heads.

Further, learned Counsel appearing for claimants vehemently submitted that the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% p.a. is also on the lower side as the accident has occurred on 28th May, 2011. In view of the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, at least 9% to 10% interest per annum may be awarded in the instant case, to meet the ends of justice and the impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly.

As against this, Shri. A.M. Venkatesh, learned Counsel appearing for Insurer vehemently submitted that the compensation awarded by Tribunal is after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also taking into consideration the age, avocation and also the year of accident etc. Therefore, interference in the same is not called for.

After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for our consideration in this appeal is,

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

The undisputed facts of the case are, the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased Krishna. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was aged about 25 years and working as an agriculturist and also Coolie. It is stated that he was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month. But, he has not produced an iota of documentary evidence in support of the same. The accident is of the year 2011 and the deceased was aged about 25 years and the only earning member in the family consisting of his parents, wife and minor daughter. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation and also the year of accident, coupled with the number of dependents, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. Further, as the dependents are four in number, we have to deduct l/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, If l/4th (i.e. Rs.1,625/-) is deducted from Rs.6,500/- towards his personal and living expenses, the net income would be Rs.4,875/- per month. Further, it is stated that the deceased was aged about 25 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, for the said age, the proper multiplier applicable is ''18'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case, 2009 A.C.J. 1298 : 2009(2) T.A.C. 677, as rightly adopted by Tribunal. Thus, the compensation towards loss of dependency would work out to Rs.10,53,000/- (i.e. Rs.4,875/- x 12 x''18'') as against Rs.4,86,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads also. The deceased has left behind wife aged about 20 years, minor daughter aged about 7 years and parents aged about 65 years and 60 years respectively and they were entirely depending upon the income of the deceased and on account of his unnatural and untimely death, they are totally displaced and in great financial crisis. Therefore, in the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions, we award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of estate as Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under these two heads; Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs.25,000/- to each claimant as against Rs.20,000/- and Rs.25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs.12,000/-awarded by Tribunal.

Further, it is seen that the deceased survived for a period of three days, from the date of accident, i.e. 28th May, 2011, before succumbing to the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. During this period, the claimants would have spent some reasonable sum towards medical expenses, including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.1,550/-. The same is on the lower side. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, number of days the deceased was in-patient in the Hospital, etc. we award a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs.1,550/- awarded by Tribunal under the said heads.

Thus, the total compensation payable to claimants works out to Rs.13,08,000/- as against Rs.5,19,550/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs.7,88,450/-.

As rightly pointed out by learned Counsel appearing for claimants, the rate of interest awarded by Tribunal at 6% per annum is on the lower side, as the accident has occurred on 28th May, 2011. Therefore, as per the ratio of law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper to award rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment ana award dated 4th May 2012, passed in MVC No. 45/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanjanagudu, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs.13,08,000/- as against Rs. 5,19,550/- awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Thus, there would be enhancement of compensation by a sum of Rs.7,88,450/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, excluding interest for the delayed period of 256 days in filing the appeal.

The Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.7,88,450/-, with interest thereon at 9% per annum, excluding interest for the delayed period of 256 days in filing the appeal, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of first appellant-wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of fifteen years, renewable by fifteen years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of second appellant-minor daughter of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, till she attains the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to first appellant/mother and natural guardian to withdraw the periodical interest, for the welfare of appellant No. 2, till she attains the age of 21 years and from 22 years to 30 years, appellant No. 2 is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest.

A sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the names of third and fourth appellants - parents of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized/Grameena Bank, for a period of five years, renewable by five years, with liberty reserved to them to withdraw their respective periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs.1,88,450/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4, in equal proportion, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.