Venkatesh and Others vs Munithimmaiah and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellants/claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 28/02/2015, passed in MVC No. 7398/2012, by the XX Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-22), (hereinafter referred to as '' Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation.

The Tribunal by its judgment and award, has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,74,000/- under different heads with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against the claim of the appellants for a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Lokesh. V, in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents and appellant No. 3 is the brother 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 17.11.2012 at about 8.00 p.m. deceased was a pedestrian on extreme left side of Bangalore-Magadi Main Road and when he came near Channenahalli bus stop towards Tavarekere, at that time, the rider of the Pulsar motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.42.L.8597 came in a rash and negligent manner without observing any traffic rules and regularities and dashed to deceased. Due to which, deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Lakshmi Specialty Hospital, Sunkada Katte, then he was shifted to Gayathri hospital, NIMHANS and Victoria Hospital. It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 22 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and working in mobile shop."

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. 5,74,000/- under different heads with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till realization.

Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal.

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

The submission of learned counsel Sri. K.N. Dayalu, appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the deceased reasonably and what is assessed is on the lower side and liable to be re-assessed. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that, deceased was aged about 22 years, working in Mobile shop and earning Rs. 14,800/- per month, but the same has not been accepted by the Tribunal and contrary, it has assessed his income at Rs. 6,000/- per month. Further, he submits that deceased was the only earning member in the family and entire family was depending on his income and therefore, his income may be reassessed between Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 7,500/- per month, deducting 50% towards his personal expenses and applying multiplier of 14'' taking the age of the younger parent, mother, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. He further submits that the compensation towards conventional heads and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court and this Court. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.

As against this, learned counsel Sri. H.S. Lingaraj, appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the Tribunal, after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file has justified in awarding reasonable compensation under all the heads and therefore, it does not call for interference.

After hearing the learned counsel 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?"

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that appellants are the parents of the deceased. It is the case of the appellants that deceased was aged about 22 years, working in Mobile shop and earning Rs. 14,800/- per month and he used to spend whatever he earns to the welfare of the family and on account of his untimely death, they suffered lot of mental shock and agony apart from financial difficulties. Having regard to the age, occupation and year of the accident, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000/- per month instead of Rs. 6,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal to meet the ends of justice. Out of which, if 50% ( Rs. 3,500/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, since he was a bachelor, his contribution to the family comes to Rs. 3,500/- per month. The appropriate multiplier applicable taking the age of the younger parent, mother of the deceased as 43 years is ''14'' as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 5,88,000/-( Rs. 3,500/- x 12 x 14) instead of Rs. 5,04,000/- 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. 1,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- each to the appellant Nos. 1 to 3, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses.

Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 8% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2012. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum on the entire compensation instead of 8% P.A. awarded by the Tribunal.

In all, the appellants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs. 7,88,000/- instead of Rs. 5,74,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of compensation of Rs. 2,14,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization on the entire compensation.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 28/02/2015, passed in MVC No. 7398/2012, by the XX Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-22), is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 2,14,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization on the entire compensation.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,14,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization on the entire compensation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,14,000/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No. 2, mother of the deceased in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 15 years, renewable by another 15 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,14,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in equal proportion.

Draw the award, accordingly.