AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—The unfortunate parents and younger brother of deceased Sidheshwar Sahu, aged about 18 years are the appellants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short `the Tribunal'') vide award dated 01.12.2010, passed in Claim Case No. 127/2010. As against the compensation of Rs. 12,10,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents and younger brother of deceased Sidheshwar Sahu, by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 14.05.2010, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.
The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Sidheshwar Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 14.05.2010; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Maruti Van bearing registration No. CG-17-D/0720; as the above offending vehicle Maruti Van, on the date of the accident, was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.
As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Maruti Van has not filed any appeal against the impugned award challenging the above findings recorded by the Tribunal the same now have attained finality.
The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 100/- per day; Rs. 3,000/- per month; and Rs. 36,000/- per annum. By deducting 2/3rd of Rs. 36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 12,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,20,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Sidheshwar Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 1,22,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.
Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants'' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month only; in deducting 2/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 10; in awarding only Rs. 2,000/- under other heads; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,22,000/- only.
Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Maruti Van, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs. 1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
In a motor accident claim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunal should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation nor a bonanza.
Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs. 1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Sidheshwar Sahu used to earn Rs. 6,000/- per month by working as Assistant in a Computer Centre, the evidence led by the claimants in that behalf was not of clinching nature. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants'' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income on its own estimate at Rs. 100/- per day; Rs. 3,000/- per month; and Rs. 36,000/- per annum.
Nevertheless, the Tribunal has erred in deducting 2/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. The deduction in that behalf, in view of the dicta of the Apex Court in the cases of Syed Basheer Ahamed and others Versus Mohammed Jameel and another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225 and Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, ought to have been to the extent of 50% of the income of the deceased. We, therefore, propose to reassess the compensation taking the claimants'' dependency at Rs. 18,000/- per annum by deducting 50% of Rs. 36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased.
The multiplier of 10 selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with considering that the claimants are parents and younger brother of the deceased and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Shri Laxman Iyer and Another, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10.
By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 18,000/- with the multiplier of 10 the compensation works out to Rs. 1,80,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 1,90,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Sidheshwar Sahu in the motor accident.
Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.
Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 68,000/- at Rs. 7,000/-.
For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,90,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 7,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 68,000/-.
Respondent No. 3 the United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months'' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy-five thousand only) (Rs. 68,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 7,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 68,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs.