AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Venugopala Gowda
One Narayanappa, a pedestrian was knocked down by bus bearing No. TS-38/N-1137 which belonged to the appellant, in a road traffic accident on 29.09.2006, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver. The deceased was a mastery and was aged about 50 years. In a claim petition filed under S.166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the respondent, MACT has passed the award for Rs. 4,98,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till two months next after the order and at 9% p.a. for subsequent period, if compensation amount is not deposited within two months. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent in the claim petition has filed this appeal. For the appellant, firstly, it is contended that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent act of the pedestrian himself. Secondly, there being no credible evidence with regard to the deceased earning Rs. 4,500/- p.m., the loss of dependency determined at Rs. 4,68,000/- is excessive. Multiplier of 12 ought to have been applied instead of 13. Thirdly, awarding of interest at 9% p.a. If the sum is not deposited within two months is erroneous.
Learned Advocate for the respondents -claimants, on the other hand, would argue in support of the findings and the award passed by the MACT and submit that there being just award, the appeal may be dismissed.
Based on the pleadings of the parties, MACT raised issues. 3rd petitioner in the MACT has deposed as PW-1, through whom Exs.P1 to P6, the police records, have been marked. Indisputedly, deceased was a pedestrian and the bus dashed against him. A complaint having been lodged with the jurisdictional police and a case having been registered, was investigated and a charge-sheet as per Ex.P3 was filed against the driver of the bus. For the respondent no evidence of whatsoever nature has been adduced. The driver of the bus has not been examined. In the circumstances, the finding recorded by the MACT on issue No. 1 with regard to rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver resulting in pedestrian - Narayanappa being knocked down resulting in he sustaining fatal injuries is well established. The first contention raised for the appellant has no merit.
Deceased was aged about 50 years, as is evident from Ex.P6. He was a mastery doing construction work. Tribunal, disbelieving the evidence of PW-1, that the deceased was earning 7200/- per day and was contributing to the family, keeping in view his age and the nature of work as well as the uncertainty factors, has taken the earnings of the deceased Narayanappa at Rs. 150/-per day or 74,500/- p.m. 1/3rd was deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and the balance was taken as contribution to the family. Multiplier of 13 was applied and loss of dependency has been determined at Rs. 4,68,000/- to which Rs. 30,000/- was added under the conventional heads.
Claim petition was filed by the widow of the deceased, a married and widowed daughter and an unmarried daughter of the deceased. During the pendency of the claim petition, widow of the deceased having passed away, petition was prosecuted by two daughters. Petitioners 2 and 3 being widowed & unmarried daughters respectively, their claim that they are dependent on the deceased is well founded. Taking into consideration the death of the 1st claimant, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/2 of the amount towards personal expenses of the deceased and the contribution to the family ought to have been taken as 72,250/-. Multiplier of 13 being applicable, the loss of dependency is 72250 x 12 x 13 = Rs. 3,51,000/-. Under the conventional heads, there has to be addition of Rs. 30,000/-. Thus the award should have been Rs. 3,81,000/-, as against which, Rs. 4,98,000/- has been awarded. The Tribunal committed error in directing payment of assessed compensation amount with 9% interest, in case, the amount is not deposited within two months from the date of Judgment. Appeal period being 90 days, the stipulation of two months is unreasonable. Keeping in view the fact that the appeal has to be allowed and compensation reduced, the interest on the compensation amount payable can be at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of deposit.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned Judgment/Award is modified. The compensation payable is determined at Rs. 3,81,000/-, which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of deposit.
Amount in deposit be transferred to MACT.
Appellant to deposit the balance compensation amount in the MACT, within a period of two months from today.
There shall be no order as to costs.