Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Indiraben Rajendra Sharma and Others

This Appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is at the instance of Insurance Company and is directed against an award dated April 26, 2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Vadodara in M.A.C.P. No. 1690 of 1991 thereby disposing of an application u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act by awarding a sum of Rs. 11,21,500 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim-application till December 31, 1999 and at the rate of 9% per annum thereafter, till realisation. It appears from record that a fatal accident occurred on June 7, 1991 when the deceased Rajendra Sharma, who was designated as Principal of Rangers College, died in a road accident. The deceased was driving a jeep on the National Highway. A dumper bearing registration No. G.Q.B. 6534 driven by respondent No. 1 which was going ahead of the jeep, abruptly stopped without indicating or giving any recognised signal, as a result, the jeep collided with the said dumper resulting in the death of the victim. The claimants demanded an amount of Rs. 40 lakh as compensation on the allegation that the victim was earning Rs. 6,000 a month at the relevant time and in near future, he would have got promotion. There is no dispute that the victim was aged 39 years at the time of accident and was in Indian Forest Service ordinarily retiring at the age of 60 years. The Tribunal below, on consideration of the materials on record, came to the conclusion that in the accident in question the victim had contributory negligence to the extent of 50%. While calculating the amount of compensation, the approach of the Tribunal was as follows: According to the Tribunal, although the victim was earning Rs. 6,000 a month, at the time of retirement he would have received a salary of Rs. 30,000 a month and adding the last salary of the deceased with the one received at the time of accident, the total comes to Rs. 36,000 and for the purpose of just and reasonable amount of compensation under the head of loss of future dependency benefit, it could be said to be that the average future monthly prospective income of the victim would be Rs. 36,000/2 = Rs. 18,000 a month. Thereafter, the Tribunal below deducted one-third of the income for the personal expenditure of the victim and then, arrived at a figure of Rs. 12,000 as loss to future monthly dependency. Thereafter, the Tribunal multiplied the said amount by 12 to arrive at an annual figure and then applied the multiplier of 15 to reach a total figure of Rs. 21,60,000. In addition to the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal further awarded Rs. 20,000 towards loss of estate, Rs. 3,000 towards funeral expenditure, Rs. 30,000 towards medical expenditure and Rs. 30,000 towards pain, shock and suffering. Thus, the total amount came to Rs. 22,43,000 and thereafter, deducting 50% towards contributory negligence, the Tribunal held that it was a fit case for grant of Rs. 11,21,500. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the aforesaid materials on record, we find that assessment of 50% negligence on the part of the victim cannot be said to be unreasonable. There is no dispute that there was no brake light of the dumper, as a result, the victim driving the jeep behind the said dumper did not get any indication that all of a sudden, the said dumper will abruptly stop. Since the accident occurred at about 7.30 in the evening in the month of June, in our opinion, assessment of 50% negligence on the part of the victim cannot be said to be unreasonable. As regards the amount of compensation assessed by the Tribunal, we, however, are unable to approve the same. In our opinion, the victim having income of Rs. 6,000 a month, the Tribunal could have applied the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , and thus, the amount should be arrived at in the following way: Rs. 6085 + Rs. 3042 x 12 = Rs. 1,09,524 are the annual loss of future prospect. Deducting one-third from the said amount, the amount would come to Rs. 73,016 and applying the multiplier of 15, the amount will be Rs. 10,95,240. Adding Rs. 83,000 awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of estate, loss of consortium, medical expenditure, funeral expenses and towards pain, shock and suffering the amount will come to Rs. 11,78,240. Since the victim had contributory negligence of 50%, it should be reduced to Rs. 5,89,120. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to Rs. 5,89,120 as compensation for death of the victim. We, accordingly, pass such order.

It appears that pursuant to order dated April 24, 2006, the claimants have already withdrawn a sum of Rs. 5 lakh. Therefore, interest on Rs. 5 lakh will be calculated upto the date of withdrawal and on the balance amount of Rs. 89,120 the interest should be calculated upto February 28, 2013 and the balance amount should be permitted to be withdrawn by the claimants and the rest amount be refunded to the Insurance Company. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.