AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Though the matter is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final adjudication.
Heard Sri. Sudarshan.M, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. S.S.Mamadapur, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
The fact is, the claimants being the sons and daughter of the deceased Gourawwa Gollar filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.VII, Vijaypur (for short ''the Tribunal'') consequent upon her death on 08.07.2010 in a vehicular accident involving Hero Honda motorcycle bearing No.KA-28/V-2448. The claim was contested by the insurer. The Tribunal allowed the petition and worked out the loss of dependency at Rs.3,15,000/-, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of expectancy, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of funeral expenses, totally awarded compensation of Rs.3,45,000/- and the insurer was directed to pay the compensation amount with interest at 6% per annum.
Sri. Sudarshan M., learned counsel for the appellant/insurer submits that the claimants are major sons and married daughter of the deceased. The husband of Gourawwa Gollar had predeceased her. The deceased was aged 64 years and her income at Rs.5,000/- assessed by the Tribunal was erroneous. None of the claimants were dependent on the deceased. The claimant No.3 who was examined as PW1 had admitted that he was getting Rs.2,000/- as salary. The claimants were entitled only under the head loss of estate and nothing else. Hence, the judgment of the Tribunal may be modified to that extent.
Sri. S.S.Mamadapur, learned counsel for respondent Nso.1 to 5 submits that though the claimants are major children of the deceased, the loss of income suffered by the family on her death cannot be ignored. The claimants had spent more than Rs.10,000/- towards her funeral expenses. The Tribunal has considered the defence raised by the insurer and placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2010 Kar. MAC 709 in the case of Arun Kumar Agrawal and another V/s National Insurance Company and others, has assessed the services and the financial contribution of the deceased, and at 2/3rd of her notional monthly income of Rs.5,000/-. The computation of the compensation amount is just and reasonable. In the event the Court comes to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled for loss of estate only, the notional income of the deceased may be taken at Rs.5,500/- to workout loss of estate arising on her death.
The Tribunal while assessing compensation towards loss of dependency has wholly placed his reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Arun Kumar Agrawal supra without noticing that the deceased in the said case was a young mother aged 39 years, a housewife and had left behind her husband and children. In the case on hand, the deceased is aged 64 years. It is unreasonable to expect a lady of her age to maintain the family of her adult children. The Tribunal fell into error in awarding compensation towards loss of consortium since her husband had predeceased her.
In that view of the matter, there is merit in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant/insurer that except the loss of estate arising out of the death and the expenses met by them towards funeral, the claimants are not entitled for anything more. By considering the date of the accident, the notional income of the deceased may be assumed at Rs.5,500/- per month. By deducting 3/4th of the same towards living and personal expenses of the deceased, she would save 1/4th of her earning which comes to Rs.1,375/-. The suitable multiplier to work out loss of expectancy of life is 7. By multiplying the annual savings at Rs.1,375/- with the multiplier 7, it comes to Rs.1,15,500/-. Further claimants are entitled for expenses towards funeral of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-. To that extent, the impugned judgment and award needs to be modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award is modified. The respondents/claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,25,500/- instead Rs.3,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
The appellant/insurer is directed to deposit the compensation amount before the jurisdictional Tribunal within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. On such deposit, the compensation amount be disbursed in favour of the respondents/claimants in accordance with the apportionment ordered by the Tribunal.
Registry is directed to transmit the statutory amount to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.