NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs QAI SHANTABEN WD/O KHUMANBHAI VESTABHAI BHILL & ORS.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Dahod (hereinafter referred to as "the learned tribunal") in MACP (New) No.1217/2004 MACP (Old) No.194/1995 by which the learned tribunal has partly allowed the Claim Petition and has awarded a total sum of Rs.5,77,800/- towards compensation for the death of the deceased -Khumanbhai Vestabhai Bhil, appellant herein - National Insurance Company Ltd. has preferred the present First Appeal.

. In the accident, which had occurred on 12/12/1994 between the Rickshaw No. GJ-17 T-2409 and Jeep bearing No. GJ-17- T-8839, deceased - Khumanbhai -driver of the Rickshaw died. Some of the passengers in the Rickshaw also sustained injuries. The heirs and legal representatives of the deceased - Khumanbhai preferred Claim Petition, being MACP (New) No.1217/2004 MACP (Old) No.194/1995 claiming a total compensation of Rs.12,50,000/- towards compensation for the death of the deceased - Khumanbhai. Thereafter, the aforesaid MACP came to be renumberd as MACP (New) No.1217/2004. 2.1 It was the case on behalf of the original claimants that the deceased - Khumanbhai at the time of the accident aged was 30 years. He was knowing driving work and was earning monthly income of Rs.6000/-. It was also the case on behalf of the original claimants that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Jeep, and therefore, original claimants claimed total compensation of Rs.12,50,000/- under different heads for the death of the deceased - Khumanbhai. The Claim Petition was resisted by the appellant herein. The appellant herein - National Insurance Company Ltd. of the Jeep involved in the accident disputed the age and the income of the deceased. 2.2 On appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal has held the driver of the Jeep involved in the accident sole negligent for the accident. On appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal has considered 30 years as the age of the deceased. On appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.2700/- per month and after adding Rs.50,000/- towards future rise in income and thereafter deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased the learned tribunal has assessed the prospective income at Rs.2700/- per month i.e. Rs.32,400/- per annum and after applying the multiplier of 17, the learned tribunal has awarded Rs.5,50,800/- towards future loss of income. Thereafter, the learned tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards loss of expectation of life, loss of consortium and Rs.5000/- towards loss of love and affection to the minor child. The learned tribunal has further awarded Rs.2000/- towards funeral ceremony. Thus, the learned tribunal has awarded Rs.5,77,800/- to the original claimants towards compensation for the death of the deceased - Khumanbhai with 9% interest thereon from the date of application till realization. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal in MACP (New) No.1217/2004, appellant - National Insurance Company has preferred the present First Appeal.

Shri Thomas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant - National Insurance Company has submitted that in the facts of the case the learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding future loss of income assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.2700/- per month. It is submitted that assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.2700/- per month in the year 1994 can be said to be on higher side. It is submitted that in the facts of the case, the learned tribunal ought to have awarded future loss of income at Rs.2000/-. It is further submitted by Shri Thomas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant that the learned tribunal has materially erred in applying the multiplier of 17 while awarding future loss of income. Making the above submissions, it is requested to allow the present Appeal to the aforesaid extent and modify the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal.

Heard Shri Thomas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant - National Insurance Company and considered the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal. 4.1 At the outset, it is required to be noted that by the impugned judgment and award the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.5,77,800/- to the original claimants toward compensation for the death of the deceased - Khumanbhai. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 30 years and was driver and the owner of the Rickshaw. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that by assessing the income per day at Rs.90/- i.e. Rs.2700/- per month can be said to be too excessive and /or on higher side, which calls for the interference of this Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that while awarding future loss of income, the learned tribunal has deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. However, looking to the number of original claimants / members in the family only 1/4th was required to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. It I also required to be noted that the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium, loss of estate only. Under the circumstances, even if assuming for the sake of submission that the amount assessed by the learned tribunal while assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.2700/- per month may be /can be said to be on higher side, to some extent, in that case also considering the aforesaid facts of the case, more particularly, when the learned tribunal has deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/4th and the learned tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- only under the head of loss of expectation of life, loss of consortium etc.. the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal is not required to be interfered with in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. The amount awarded by the learned tribunal cannot be said to be too exorbitant, which calls for the interference of this Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.

In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the present Appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.