AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Sreenivase Gowda
This appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal,
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Appeal is admitted and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
As there is no dispute regarding death of the deceased Sri. K. Gopal in the road traffic accident that occurred on 04.08.1989 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver and the liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle to pay compensation to the claimants, the only point that remains for ray consideration in this appeal is.
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?
Learned counsel appearing for the claimants contends that compensation awarded by the tribunal is not just and reasonable and it deserves to be enhanced.
Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent insurance company submits that as deceased was a bachelor, claim petition came to be filed by his parents and during the pendency of the claim petition his parents also died and their other children, i.e., the brothers and sister of the deceased, were brought on record and therefore the Tribunal committed an error in deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses and taking 2/3rd of his income as loss of estate.
The deceased was aged 27 years at the time of his death in the accident as evident from Ex.P.4-post-mortem report. Claimants in support of their contention that deceased was working in a fertilizer company and was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month, except adducing oral evidence, have not produced any documentary evidence to establish the employment and income of the deceased. In the absence of proof of income, considering the age of the deceased and year of the accident, his income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,500/ is just and proper. Initially, claim petition was filed by the parents of the deceased, both of them died during the pendency of the claim petition and their other children i.e., the brothers and sister of the deceased were brought on record. Therefore, 3/4th of the income of the deceased has to be deducted towards personal expenses and remaining 1/4th can be taken as his contribution to the family. Multiplier of 7 adopted by the Tribunal is just and proper. So, loss of dependency works out to Rs. 73,500/- ( Rs. 1,750 x 1/4 x 12 x 7) whereas the tribunal has awarded against Rs. 2,39,000/-.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/-towards conventional expenses, which is just and proper and does not require enhancement,
As the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs. 2,39,000/- is more than just entitlement, the claimants are not entitled to any enhancement.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits.
Shri. M.K. Soudagar, learned counsel, who is directed to take notice for the 2nd respondent-insurance company is granted four weeks time to file vakalath.
No order as to costs.