Vishwanath and Others vs Kapil Sarin and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

This is claimants appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 7th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, "the Tribunal") vide award dated 25th January, 2002 passed in Claim Case No. 15/2000.

The claimants, unfortunate father, sisters and brother of deceased -Dev Kumar claimed compensation of Rs. 11,53,000/- by filing a claim petition u/s 163 (A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the Act") for his death in the motor accident on 14.11.1999, when his Motor Cycle (Bullet) bearing registration No. MP-23/Y-0154 was dashed by other Motor Cycle Hero Honda bearing registration No. MP-23/MC-6300 resulting in multiple serious injuries to deceased - Dev Kumar, who succumbed to those injuries during the course of his treatment in the hospital. The claimants further pleaded that deceased - Dev Kumar was aged about 25 years and used to earn Rs. 88,000/- per annum.

The owner and driver of Hero Honda Motor Cycle contested the claim and in their joint written statement denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants on the plea that the deceased himself was responsible for the accident. The Insurer of Hero Honda Motor Cycle also contested the claim and took the plea that the Motor Cycle was being used in breach of the policy conditions.

The claimants examined AW/1-Vishwanath & AW/2 - Dhruv Kumar Tiwari, in support of their claim, whereas, the owner and driver of the Motor Cycle examined NAW/1 - Kapil Sareen in rebuttal.

The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, held that deceased - Dev Kumar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 14.11.1999, the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motor cyclist of Hero Honda Motor Cycle; and as the Hero Honda Motor Cycle on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 41,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses and another sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards business related expenses, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 17,700/- per annum. By multiplying annual dependency of Rs. 17,700/- with the multiplier of 21, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 2,12,400/-. By awarding a further sum of Rs. 17,000/- under the other heads, the Tribunal awarded total sum of Rs. 2,29,400/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased - Dev Kumar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 2,29,400/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri SC Verma, learned Counsel for the Appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants'' evidence about the income of the deceased, in assessing his income at Rs. 41,000/- per annum only, in assessing the claimants'' dependency at Rs. 17,700/- per annum only, and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 2,29,400/-.

Shri Ali Asgar, learned Counsel for the insurer of Hero Honda Motor Cycle, on the other hand, supported the award and submitted that the Tribunal has been quite liberal in awarding a substantial amount of Rs. 2,29,400/- as compensation to the claimants.

Shri RK Pali, learned Counsel for Respondents No. 1 & 2 also supported the impugned award.

True, the claimants pleaded in their claim petition that deceased -Dev Kumar used to earn Rs. 88,000/- per annum, but, the Income Tax return for the relevant year produced before the Tribunal disclosed the income of the deceased at Rs. 41,000/- per annum only. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs. 41,000/- per annum.

As deceased - Dev Kumar was unmarried; his father - Claimant No. 1 - Vishwanath was having his own income; Claimants No. 2, 3 & 4, who are sisters and brother of deceased - Dev Kumar were dependent on their father, Claimant No. 1 - Vishwanath, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the claimants'' dependency by the Tribunal at Rs. 17,700/- per annum.

The multiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Shri Laxman Iyer and Another, , wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10.

We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants'' dependency, or the multiplier selected.

The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.