AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice P. Devadass
The appellant/vehicle owner challenges the award of the Claims Tribunal on several grounds. The claimants'' son Mansoor, lost his life in a road
accident. His parents were granted a total compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-. The break-up figure is as under:-
Sl. No. Head Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency 225000
Loss of love and affection 20000
(Rs.10,000 x 2)
Cremation expenses 5000
Total 250000
Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that at the time of accident the deceased boy, all of a sudden, crossed the road and caused the
accident. The Tribunal had also not deducted 1/3 from the notional income and further the interest awarded @ 9% p.a. is also excessive.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel for the claimants would contend that in notional income, deduction should not be effected. What was
granted is also very less.
I have anxiously considered the rival submissions.
On 25.07.2001, at about 4.30 p.m., on the ECR Road, the Tata Safari vehicle owned by the appellant came driven by his driver hit against the
boy Mansoor. Subsequently, the boy died due to the injuries. PW.2, the eyewitness spoken extensively as to the reckless manner in which the
vehicle was came driven. That was also mentioned in Ex. P4 FIR. As against this, positive evidence on record, there is no contra evidence. In the
circumstances, the Tribunal has rightly fastened negligence on the part of driver of the appellant.
In Ex. P1 postmortem certificate, the age of the deceased boy has been mentioned as 12. As per Ex. P5, School Record Sheet, the boy''s age
was only 7 years. Then, the boy was studying IV standard. In such circumstances, then he would not be running 12 years.
The deceased boy was a non-earning member. In the circumstances, the Court has to go by notional income. But, it should not be irrational. It
must be reasonable. It must be neither low nor high. In this case, the Tribunal had adopted Rs.15,000/- p.a. In the facts and circumstances,
considering the spiraling increase in the cost of essential commodities, Rs.20,400/- p.a. (Rs.1,700 X 12) would be reasonable. As per the
structured formula, the multiplier is 15.
The Tribunal has not effected any deduction. As per the schedule appended to Motor Vehicles Act, 1/3 deduction has to be made. So, after
1/3 deduction, it comes to Rs.13,600/- p.a. and for the multiplier ''15'', it comes to Rs.2,04,000/-.
We are not disturbing other heads of compensation. The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 9% p.a. In the facts and circumstances, the interest
awarded by the Tribunal cannot be stated to be excessive.
The award of the Tribunal is modified as under:-
Sl. No. Head Amount awarded by theAmount awarded by this
Tribunal in Rs. Court in Rs.
Loss of dependency 225000 204000
Loss of love and 20000 20000
affection (Rs.10,000 x
2)
Cremation expenses 5000 5000
Total 250000 229000
In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part. The award amount is modified The claimants are awarded a total compensation of
Rs.2,29,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of original petition till deposit. The appellant will deposit the entire compensation
amount within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, less amount if any, already deposited. On such deposit, the claimants
are permitted to withdraw their amount, less amount if any, already withdrawn. Both the parties are directed to bear their own costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.