First Appeal No. 492 Of 1995 vs Unknown

                                         1

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                      NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                             
                                                     
    First Appeal No. 492 of 1995

    Appellants        :     1.  Kantilal Mangilal Kothari, aged about 47




                                                    
                            years, occ: service, 

                            2. Ku Priti d/o Kantilal Kothari, aged 20 years,




                                            
                            3. Ku Smita d/o Kantilal Kothari, aged 18 years
                          
                            4. Ku Trupti d/o Kantilal Kothari, aged 15 years

                            Nos. 2 to 4, through guardian-father Kantilal
                         
                            Mangilal Kothari, all residents of Ganesh 

                            Nagar, Near Gosavi Colony, Amravati
        


                            versus
     



    Respondents       :     1.  Bhujang Bapurao Phukey, aged about

43 years, occ: Driver, resident of Rathi Nagar (Gadge Nagar), Amravati

2. M/s Keshaorao Balkisan Agrawal, a Partnership Firm, through its Partners (a) Balkisan Mahadeo Agrawal, (b) Jagdishprasad Kaularam Agrawal, Both residents of Cotton Market Road, Amravati

3. The United India Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Office at Badnera Road, Amravati ::: Downloaded on - 27/11/2013 20:32:20 ::: 2 Mr A. S. Mehadia, Advocate for appellants Mr K. K. Shelke, Advocate for respondent no. 1 Respondent no. 2 served Mr V. L. Somalwar, Advocate for respondent no.3 Coram : A. P. Bhangale, J Dated : 13th November 2013 Oral Judgment

1. When appellants no. 1, 4 and wife of appellant no. 1 Shobha were standing by the side of their Luna bearing No. MGT 9046, ambassador car bearing No. MZV 1861 driven by respondent no. 1; owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 dashed against it from back side. All the three received injuries. Shobha who suffered serious injuries, was shifted to General Hospital, Amravati where she died.

According to claimants, Shobha (aged about 35 years) was self-employed and was engaged in tailoring work. She used to earn Rs. 1500-2000 per month from that work. Appellants claimed Rs. 3 lacs as compensation on various counts.

3. Learned Member of the Tribunal after taking into consideration the evidence led on record and hearing the parties, awarded compensation of Rs. 90,000/- inclusive of interim compensation of Rs.

25,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date ::: Downloaded on - 27/11/2013 20:32:20 ::: 3 of application till realization of the award amount.

4. According to the claimants, the compensation so granted is inadequate and their claim petition should have been allowed in its entirety. Hence, this appeal.

5. To my mind, compensation awarded by the learned Member is on lower side. Learned Member failed to appreciate that deceased Shobha was not merely house-wife, but she was supporting the family by doing stitching work and used to earn Rs. 1500-2000 per month. Even in case of self-employed person, income for expectancy of life and prospective increases in the personal income needs to be considered while awarding just and reasonable compensation to the family members and dependents of the deceased victim.

6. Although it was alleged by the Insurance Company that driver was in a drunken state at the time of accident, there was no evidence on record to substantiate that allegation.

7. Bearing in mind future prospects in the income of deceased Shobha, the income should have been treated at least in the sum of Rs.

2000/-. Victim was belonging to the family consisting of her husband and three minor daughters who were aged about 15, 13 and 10 years respectively as on the date of accident. Thus, the victim had four dependents when she died as a result of motor vehicle accident. That being so, 25% of the amount from the sum of Rs. 2000/- is deductible.

Thus, annual loss of dependency was in the sum of Rs. 18,000/- and considering age of the victim, appropriate multiplier "17" should have been applied. Claimants were also entitled to funeral expenses of Rs. 5,000/-

and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of love and affection as also Rs. 25,000/- for loss of consortium to widower. Thus, total compensation for the fatal accident could have been at least in the sum of Rs. 3,46,000/-. In my opinion, reasonable interest would be 9% per annum on the unpaid sum of compensation from the date of application till realization. Hence, impugned Award is modified as under :

8. In the result, appeal is allowed. Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 3,46,000/- towards compensation with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application till realization together with costs throughout. Impugned Award stands modified accordingly.

A. P. BHANGALE, J joshi ::: Downloaded on - 27/11/2013 20:32:20 :::