AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 8th December 2006, passed in M.V.C. No. 876/2005, by the 18th Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City, (SCCH-4), (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 4,14,000/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 10.00 Lakhs, is inadequate.
The facts in brief are that, the claimants Appellants were the wife, mother and son of the deceased Late A. Anthoni Raj. But, the Appellant No. 1 wife of the deceased has been given up and deleted before the Trial Court, as no more. The claimants filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 7:30 P.M, on 15-10-2004, when the deceased was travelling in an auto rickshaw, he met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of a BMTC Bus bearing No. KA-05/B-6197 and due to the injuries sustained in the said accident, he succumbed to the same.
It is the case of the Appellants that, the deceased was aged about 33 years, working as auto rickshaw driver and hale and healthy prior to the accident and was contributing the entire sum to the family requirements and on account of his untimely death, the family has become haywire, the child has lost the love and affection of the father and the mother has lost, the son at an young age and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.
On account of the 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 8th December 2006. 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. 4,14,000/- under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the Appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.
I have heard learned Counsel for Appellants and learned Counsel for Insurance Company, for considerable length of time.
It is the submission of the learned Counsel appearing for Appellants that, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month and therefore having regard to the age, avocation and the year of accident, his income may be re-assessed at?4,500/- per month and the impugned judgment and award may be modified accordingly.
As against this, learned Counsel appearing for the Insurer, inter alia, contended and substantiated the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal stating that the compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for interference.
After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and after going through the original records made available, it is seen that the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. The deceased was aged about 33 years and an autorickshaw driver. The monthly income assessed by Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- is on the lower side and needs to be re-assessed. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation and year of accident, I re-assess the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,000/- and deduct 1/3rd towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, having regard to the number of dependents. Since the deceased was aged about 33 years, the appropriate multiplier is ''16'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, Accordingly re-determine compensation payable towards loss of dependency at Rs. 5,12,064/- (i.e. Rs. 2,667/- � 12 � ''16'') as against Rs. 3,84.000/- awarded by Tribunal.
Further, the Tribunal also erred in not awarding reasonable compensation under the conventional heads. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. I award a sum of Rs. 40.000/- towards the conventional heads such as loss of love and affection, transportation of dead body and funeral expenses and loss of life expectancy/loss of estate.
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 and award dated 8th December 2006, passed in M.V.C. No. 876/2005, by the 18th Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City, (SCCH-4), is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 5,52,064/- as against Rs. 4,14,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. There would be an enhancement of compensation of Rs. 1.38,064/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,38,064/-, with interest, thereon at: 6% per annum, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award.
Immediately on such deposit: by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in Fixed Deposit in the name of the third Appellant - son of the deceased in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank, till he attains majority with liberty reserved to the second Appellant - guardian of the third Appellant to withdraw the periodical interest for his welfare.
Remaining sum of Rs. 38,064/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the Appellant No. 2 mother of deceased, immediately..
Office to draw award, accordingly.
Smt. Harini Shivanand, learned Counsel is permitted to file vakalath, on behalf of first Respondent, without four weeks from today.