AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.M. Doshit, J.—With the consent of the learned advocates the Appeal is heard and disposed of today. This Appeal preferred by the United India Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ''the Insurance Company''), the insurer of both the offending vehicles, arises from the judgment and award dated 15th February, 2005 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 1029 of 2000. The respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the claimants-the widow and minor children of the deceased Mangalbhai Patel.
On 07th February, 2000 the deceased Mangalbhai Patel was travelling on a tractor-trailer bearing Registration No. GJ-8-D-672 and GTF-5057. The said tractor-trailer was hit by the offending metador bearing Registration No. GJ-7-X-4589. The deceased fell down the trailer and suffered fatal injuries. The claimants filed the above referred Claim Petition No. 1029 of 2000 for compensation in the sum of Rs. 20 lakhs. According to the claimants, the deceased was 40 years of age and had a cloth shop at Mansa and was earning around Rs. 2 lakhs every year. In support of their claims, the claimant No. 1-widow examined herself at Ex.41. She also examined one Gandabhai Amtharam at Ex.48, who was maintaining the accounts of the deceased and one Ganeshbhai-an eye-witness at Ex.51. She produced the Income Tax chalans for the years 1983 to 2000 to prove the income of the deceased.
On the basis of the School Leaving Certificate it was found that at the time of his death, the deceased was 43 years of age. Considering the Income Tax paid by the deceased from year to year, the Tribunal assessed his annual income at Rs. 75,000/-. Considering the future increase in the income, the average income of the deceased was estimated by the Tribunal at Rs. 1,12,500/-. From that 1/3rd amount has been deducted for the maintenance and personal expenses of the deceased. Thus, the annual dependency loss has been worked out at Rs. 75,000/-. The Tribunal has adopted the multiplier of 15 and calculated the dependency loss at Rs. 1,12,500/-. To that the conventional amount of Rs. 20,000/- has been added. Thus, the claimants have been awarded total compensation in the sum of Rs. 11,45,000/- and interest at the rate of 9% per annum and the proportionate cost. Therefore, present appeal.
Mr. Shelat has appeared for the Insurance Company. He has assailed the impugned judgment and award. He has submitted that the finding recorded by the Tribunal of the annual income of the deceased to be at Rs. 75,000/- is not supported by evidence on record. The evidence submitted by the claimants is the Income Tax chalans which prove that the deceased had a taxable income. Considering the provisions at the relevant time and the amount of taxes paid by the deceased, it is evident that the annual income of the deceased was not more than around Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 60,000/-. He has submitted that the dependency loss calculated by the Tribunal is required to be decreased accordingly. He has also submitted that the multiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal is excessive. In view of the prevalent judgment it could not have been more than 11 years or 12 years.
Mr. Prajapati has appeared for the claimants and has contested the appeal.
We do agree that the Income Tax chalans produced by the claimants do not prove the income of the deceased. In absence of any other evidence on record, the Tribunal was required to do some guess work relying upon the taxes paid by the deceased during past few years. We are of the opinion that the annual income of Rs. 75,000/- inferred by the Tribunal cannot be said to be wholly wrong nor that finding requires to be interfered with. Considering the future increase in the income, the average annual income of Rs. 1,12,500/- worked out by the Tribunal also does not warrant interference. We, therefore, hold that the Tribunal has correctly calculated the annual dependency loss at Rs. 75,000/-.
As to the multiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal, we do agree that it is excessive. Considering 43 years of age of the deceased, to us the multiplier of 13 appears to be adequate. We accordingly hold that the claimants are entitled to compensation in the sum of Rs. 9,75,000/- by way of loss of dependency. The conventional amount of Rs. 20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is adequate. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation in the sum of Rs. 9,95,000/-. The order for interest at the rate of 9% per annum and proportionate cost is confirmed. The amount of compensation be apportioned between mother and children in the ratio of 2:1:1. The Registry will draw the award accordingly.
The Appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent with cost.
From the award amount a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs be invested in a Nationalised Bank in Fixed Deposit for a period of three years. The claimants will be entitled to recover periodical interest every three months. On expiry of the period of three years, the Fixed Deposit be renewed on the same terms and conditions for a period of two years every time. The remainder of the award amount be disbursed to the claimants in accordance with the apportionment made hereinabove. The remaining amount be remitted to the appellant-Insurance Company.
Subject to the above directions, Civil Applications stand disposed of.