AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Though this matter is posted today for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. This appeal by the appellants-claimants is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 31/03/2010 passed in MVC No. 6/2008, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-VII, Doddaballapura, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that a sum of Rs. 2,46,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads, with interest at 6% per annum against the claim of Rs. 26,50,000/-, on account of the death the deceased Sri. Channakrishnappa, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Sri. Channakrishnappa. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 30.10.2007 deceased was riding his bicycle towards Doddaballapur APMC Market from his village along with vegetable carrying in his bicycle and when he came near Mestrumane cross on Doddaballapur Dabaspet main road, at around 6.00 a.m., at that time, the rider of the bike bearing No. KA.43.H.1680 came with high speed in a rash and negligent manner behind him and dashed against the deceased, who had fell down from bicycle and sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital but succumbed to injuries on the way to hospital.
It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 22 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, and earning Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 8,000/- per month, working as Vegetable vendor and also earning Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per annum from agricultural work. Due to his untimely death, appellant Nos. 1 and 2 who were completely depending upon his earnings have lost their son, who was their future hopes and security, apart from mental shock and agony.
The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 2,46,000/- under different heads, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.
Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- per month is on lower side and it is liable to be enhanced reasonably. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that deceased was aged about 22 years, agriculturist-cum-vegetable vendor by profession and earning substantially and therefore, the income of the deceased may be re-assessed reasonably. Further, he submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is inadequate and it needs to be enhanced. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and conventional heads.
As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper arid after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file. Further he submits that the appellants have not produced any documentary evidence to show the exact income of the deceased and therefore, the Tribunal is justified in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month. Hence, the appeal filed by the appellants is liable to be dismissed.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the materials available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
The occurrence of the accident on 30.10.2007 and resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. The dependants are the parents of the deceased. It is also not in dispute that, deceased was aged about 22 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and the dependants are his parents. It emerges from the judgment that, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month which is on lower side and it needs to be modified. Having regard to the age and occupation of the deceased and year of the accident, we re-assess his income at Rs. 4,500/- instead of Rs. 3,000/- per month. Out of which, if 50% ( Rs. 2,250/-) is deducted towards his personal expenses since he was a bachelor, his net income comes to Rs. 2,250/- per month. The proper multiplier applicable taking the age of the younger parent-mother of the deceased as 50 years, is ''13'', in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma''s case reported in 2009 ACJ 1298. Therefore, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 3,51,000/- ( Rs. 2,250/- x 12 x 13) instead of Rs. 2,16,200/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads, such as, loss of love and affection, loss of estate and transportation and funeral expenses instead of Rs. 30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 3,96,000/- instead of Rs. 2,46,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization (excluding interest for the delayed period of 393 days in filing the appeal). For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part and the impugned judgment and award dated 31/03/2010 passed in MVC No. 6/2008, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court VII, Doddaballapura, is hereby modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, (excluding interest for the delayed period of 393 days in filing the appeal), in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The first respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization (excluding interest for the delayed period of 393 days in filing the appeal)., within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Immediately on such deposit by the 1st respondent-Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in the names of each of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2, in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of ten years and renewable by another five years, with liberty reserved to them to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.
The remaining sum of Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in equal proportion, immediately.
Draw the award, accordingly.