AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 23rd January 2007, passed in MVC No. 355/2005, by the Additional Civil Judge(Sr. Dn), Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hassan, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 9,07,112/- awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 30,00,000/-, is inadequate. The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the wife and major son of deceased Thimmegowda. They filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 8:45 P.M, on 04-11-2004, when the deceased was returning from his office in his TVS Moped bearing No. KA-13/K-1319 on Salagame Road, in front of Sanjeevini Hospital, a Lorry bearing Registration No. KA-01/B-4507, came from behind the TVS, being driven by its driver at high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the TVS. As a result of the same, the deceased sustained injuries over the head and all over the body. Immediately he was shifted to Sanjeevini Hospital, Hassan and thereafter to Manipal Hospital, Bangalore, where he was in-patient for a period of two months.
It is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 57 years and working as Mastery at MESCAM, drawing monthly salary of a sum of Rs. 18,744/- per month and was hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants have lost the love and affection, social and financial support and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.
On account of the death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 23rd January, 2007. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 9,07,112/- under different heads, with 6% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.
We have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for second respondent/Insurer, for quite some time.
After hearing learned counsel for the claimants and also the Insurer and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, we are of the view that the Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has erred in not assessing the reasonable monthly income of the deceased, inasmuch as it has proceeded to take 50% of the gross salary and adopting split multiplier method. As per Ex. P4, Salary Certificate, the deceased was drawing salary of Rs. 18,744/- per month. As per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, the admissible deductions for assessing the monthly income of the deceased are only income tax and professional tax. In the case on hand, if income tax of Rs. 2,000/- and professional tax of Rs. 200/- are deducted from out of the gross income of the deceased at Rs. 18,744/-, the net income comes to Rs. 16,544/- per month. Out of the said income, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, if 1/3rd ( Rs. 5,515/-) is deducted, the net income comes to Rs. 11,029/- per month. Since the deceased was aged about 57 years, the proper multiplier applicable is ''9''. Accordingly, the compensation towards loss of dependency works out to Rs. 11,91,132/- (i.e. Rs. 11,029/- x 12 x ''9'') as against Rs. 8,82,112/- awarded by Tribunal.
Further, the Tribunal erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conventional heads. A sum of Rs. 25,000/- awarded under the said heads is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced. As per the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma''s case, we award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads such as, loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection and transportation of dead body and funeral expenses as against Rs. 25,000/- awarded by Tribunal.
Thus, the total compensation would work out to Rs. 12,36,132/- as against Rs. 9,07,112/- awarded by Tribunal and the enhancement of compensation would come to Rs. 3,29,020/- with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 23rd January 2007, passed in MVC No. 355/2005, by the Additional Civil Judge(Sr. Dn), Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hassan, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 3,29,020/-, with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal.
The second respondent /Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,29,020/-, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award.
Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the first appellant-wife of deceased, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/ Nationalized Bank, for a period of five years, renewable by another five years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the periodical interest.
Remaining sum of Rs. 79,020/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellants No. 1 and 2, in equal proportion, immediately.
Office to draw award, accordingly.