AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the appellant-claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 29/07/2013, passed in MVC No. 188/2012, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangalore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation., on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 12,72,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with current and future interest at 6% per annum as against the claim Rs. 40,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Khem Bahadur Sonar, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The appellant is the wife of the deceased. She has 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 6.10.2011 at about 10.30 p.m. deceased was walking on the road near Samrudhi Bar and Restaurant, Kulai, Mangalore Taluk, at that time, the driver of the bus bearing Reg. No. KA.20.L.4651 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to which, deceased sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to A.J. Hospital, Mangalore, where Doctors have declared him as dead.
It is the further case of the appellant that, deceased was aged about 33 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Pipe Fitter at Technimont ICB Pvt.Ltd. in MRPL site, Mangalore and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. Due to his untimely death, appellant-wife has lost her husband and also suffered financial loss as she has lost the bread earner, apart from mental shock and agony.
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. 12,72,000/- under different heads with current and future interest at 6% p.a.
Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, for enhancement.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel for Insurer.
The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, at the outset is that, the deceased was aged about 33 years, appellant is the wife of the deceased and he was hale and healthy prior to the accident that occurred on 6.10.2011. Further, she has submitted that, the Tribunal has grossly erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month contrary to the documentary evidence produced by the appellant as per the extraction made by the Tribunal in para-22 of its judgment which shows the average income of the deceased was more than Rs. 13,000/- per month. Therefore, she submitted that the income of the deceased may be re-assessed reasonably at rupees 12 to 13 thousand per month. Further, she submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is also on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably. Further, she submits that, the rate of interest awarded is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court atleast at 9 to 10%. Therefore, she submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.
As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file. Further he submits that, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses of the deceased on the ground that wife is the only dependant and submitted that appellant has not made out any good grounds for enhancing the compensation amount. Therefore, he submitted that the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
After hearing the learned counsel appearing for 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. Further, it is not in dispute that deceased was aged about 33 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Pipe Fitter and died on account of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. After careful perusal of para-22 of the judgment, the Tribunal has extracted the salary slips of the deceased produced by the appellant as per Exs.P10 to P18 and the average salary for last three months comes to Rs. 13,000/- and above per month. Therefore, having regard to the age, occupation and year of the accident and the dependant is the wife alone who was aged about 32 years and she has lost her husband, we re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 12,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice instead of Rs. 6,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if 1/3rd ( Rs. 4,000/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased as rightly done by the Tribunal, his net contribution to the family comes to Rs. 8,000/- per month. The appropriate multiplier applicable is ''16'' since deceased was aged about 33 years in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) ACJ 1298 : AIR 2009 SC 3104 : (2009) CLT 1055 : (2009) 6 JT 495 : (2009) 6 SCALE 129 : (2009) 6 SCC 121 : (2009) 5 SCR 1098 : (2009) 5 UJ 2280 : (2009) AIRSCW 4992 : (2009) 3 Supreme 487 as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 15,36,000/- ( Rs. 8,000/- x 12 x 16) instead of Rs. 11,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on account of the untimely death of the deceased, wife has lost her husband and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court and this Court, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium as against Rs. 25,000/-, Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of love and affection as against Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses as against Rs. 45,000/-. However, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of estate is just and reasonable and therefore, it does not call for interference.
Thus, the appellant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 17,36,000/- instead of Rs. 12,72,000/-as awarded by the Tribunal.
Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, 6% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2011. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation instead of 6% awarded by the Tribunal.
There would be an enhancement of Rs. 4,64,000/-with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization (excluding interest for the delayed period of 312 days in filing the appeal).
For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 29/07/2013, passed in MVC No. 188/2012, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangalore, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,64,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization (excluding interest for the delayed period of 312 days in filing the appeal), in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,64,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization (excluding interest for the delayed period of 312 days in filing the appeal), within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Immediately on deposit by the Insurer, the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,64,000/-, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years, renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.
Remaining sum of Rs. 1,64,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant immediately.
Draw the award accordingly.