Naseema and Another vs M.R. Palaniyappa and Others

A.S. Pachhapure, J.—Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. The appellants dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of one Abdulsattar in a motor vehicle accident, have filed this appeal seeking enhancement.

The facts reveal that on 06.01.2008 at 9.30 a.m. one Abdulsattar, the husband of the 1st appellant was travelling in the Bus bearing Reg. No. KA-22-B-4899 from Hubli to Bijapur and on the way, the driver drove it in a rash and negligent manner and hit the lorry bearing Reg. No. MH-28/B-7338, which was also driven in a rash and negligent way. Thereby, Abdulsattar sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The wife of the deceased and her son made a claim for compensation before the Tribunal for loss of dependency and other conventional heads.

During the enquiry, claimant No. 1 examined herself as PW. 1 and in her evidence, documents Exs. P1 to P4 were marked.

The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record has granted compensation of Rs. 2,89,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. towards loss of dependency and other conventional heads. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, the present appeal is filed.

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

The point that arise for my consideration is,

Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation? If so, to what extent?

Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the income of the deceased assessed is on the lower side and it needs enhancement. So also he submits that the compensation awarded towards loss of consortium and other heads is meagre and requires reconsideration. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 4 - insurers submit that the 2nd appellant is not the dependent, as he has attained the age of majority and personal deductions of deceased has to be 50%. On these grounds, they submit to affirm the award by dismissing the appeal.

The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Abdulsattar at Rs. 3,000/- per month, as he was doing photo frame work. This approach of the Tribunal appears to be erroneous for the reason that the accident occurred in the year 2008 and as accepted by the parties in Lok Adalats, the income is generally accepted at Rs. 4,500/- in the absence of any documentary evidence. Therefore, the income of the deceased will have to be accepted as 4,500/- per month.

So far as the personal expenses of the deceased are concerned, 1/3rd is deducted by the Tribunal. On this aspect of the matter, learned counsel for the appellants has placed reliance on an unreported judgment of this Court in MFA No. 4685/2010 (MV) dated 02.12.2010. Wherein, this Court referring to the decision in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, and as no ratio was laid in the said decision in respect of claim by the wife, was of the opinion that in a case where the wife loses her husband in an accident, her status in the society and dependency in her lifetime after the death of her husband will have to be considered and deduction has to be only 1/3 in case if the husband is dead and it could be 50% in case if the death is of the wife. I think, this approach appears to be just and reasonable and therefore, the deductions as done by the Tribunal at 1/3 has to be affirmed.

Accepting the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month and deducting 1/3 towards the personal expenses, the loss of dependency would be Rs. 3,96,000/- (4500 � 1500 = 3000 x 12 x 11); deducting a sum of Rs. 2,64,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 1,32,000/- towards loss of dependency. The Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on conventional heads. Though the learned counsel contends that this amount awarded on each of the heads has to be enhanced, generally as the compensation in case of deaths on conventional heads is granted at Rs. 40,000/-, the claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 15,000/-. Thereby, the appellants ate entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 1,47,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a.

Therefore, the point raised is answered in the affirmative. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part.

The appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,47,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Out of the enhanced compensation, Rs. 1,40,000/- shall be paid to appellant No. 1 and the remaining amount shall be paid to appellant No. 2.