Thippamma and Others vs Nagappa and Others

H. Billappa, J.—1. This appeal by the appellants/claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.06.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Bellary, in M.V.C. No. 219/2012.

By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 7,23,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

Aggrieved by that, the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal.

Briefly stated the facts are; The appellants/claimants are the wife, children and parents of the deceased Lakshmikanth. That on 20.01.2012, the deceased Lakshmikanth along with his friend Chinnaiah were waiting for the bus in the bus stand to return to their native place Giddapura. At about 2.30 p.m., a Maruti Car bearing registration No. KA-34/N-507 being driven in a rash and negligent manner came and dashed against the deceased Lakshmikanth. As a result of that, the deceased Lakshmikanth sustained injuries and died at the spot. The appellants who are the wife, children and parents of the deceased Lakshmikanth claimed compensation of Rs. 87 lakhs. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 7,23,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by that, the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement.

The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contended that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- p.m. The deceased was doing sheep vending business and also running a grocery shop and earning Rs. 15,000/- p.m. Further, he submitted that the Tribunal has not considered future prospects. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium and funeral expenses is inadequate and needs to be enhanced. Further, he submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of love and affection. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified.

As against this, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the Tribunal on proper consideration of the material on record has awarded just and reasonable compensation and therefore, it does not call for interference. He also submitted that in the absence of any acceptable evidence regarding the income, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- p.m. which is proper. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award does not call for interference.

We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

The point that arises for our consideration is;

"Whether the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified?"

It is relevant to note, the deceased Lakshmikanth died in the accident that occurred on 20.01.2012 is not in dispute. The liability of the Insurance Company is also not in dispute. The Tribunal taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- p.m. and adopting the multiplier of 17 has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,88,500/- towards loss of dependency. It is in the evidence that the deceased was doing sheep vending business and also running a grocery shop and earning Rs. 15,000/- p.m. But, there is no documentary evidence regarding the income of the deceased. In the absence of acceptable evidence, we consider it proper to take the income of the deceased at least at Rs. 6,500/- p.m. keeping in view the nature of work that the deceased was doing. The Tribunal has not considered future prospects. 50% of the income needs to be added towards future prospects. If 50% is added, then the income of the deceased comes to Rs. 9,750/- p.m. As there are 5 dependants, 1/4th needs to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. The balance comes to Rs. 7,312/-. Therefore, the loss of dependency per month is Rs. 7,312/-. The deceased was aged 29 years at the time of accident. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier is 17. The compensation payable towards loss of dependency comes to Rs. 7,312 X 12 X 17 : 14,91,648/-. Accordingly, we award a sum of Rs. 14,91,648/- towards loss of dependency.

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of consortium which is inadequate. We award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium.

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses is also inadequate. We award a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses.

The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of love and affection. We award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection.

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of estate and it does not call for interference.

The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 17,21,648/- and the break up is as follows:

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Bellary, in M.V.C. No. 219/2012 stands modified enhancing compensation by Rs. 9,98,148/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation of Rs. 9,98,148/- shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

Out of the enhanced compensation, the 1st appellant shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- with proportionate interest. The appellants 2 and 3 shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,99,074/- each with proportionate interest. The appellants 4 and 5 shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with proportionate interest.

The entire enhanced amount awarded in favour of the appellants 2 and 3 shall be invested in a fixed deposit in any nationalised bank till they attain majority. The appellant No. 1 who is mother and guardian of the appellants 2 and 3 shall be entitled to withdraw interest accrued on it and spend it for the upkeep of appellants 2 and 3.

50% of the enhanced amount awarded in favour of appellants 1, 4 and 5 shall be invested in fixed deposit in any nationalised Bank for a period of three years. The appellants 1, 4 and 5 shall be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on it. The balance amount shall be released in favour of the appellants 1, 4 and 5.