1 FA.627-2001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.627/2001.
Smt. Pushpabai w/o Prabhakarrao Halge,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Household,
R/o: Sadar Bazar, Hingoli,
Tal. and District Hingoli. ...APPELANT
Versus
United India Insurance Company
Limited, Through : Its Branch
Manager, Parbhani, Tal. and
District Parbhani. ...RESPONDENT
.....
Mr. B. S. Kudale , Advocate for Appellant
Mr. A.G. Kanade, Advocate for Respondent
...
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATED : 20TH JUNE, 2017. ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and award passed by the Member Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Hingoli, dated 5 th May, 2001 in M.A.C.P.No.224/2000, the original claimant has preferred this appeal only to the extent of quantum.
2. The learned counsel for appellant-original claimant submits that, the claimant has examined P.W.2 who happens ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 ::: 2 FA.627-2001 to be income tax practitioner. Deceased Prabhakar used to submit his income tax returns through P.W.2 Pradeep. The deceased Prabhakar was earning from his business as well as from agriculture lands. Deceased Prabhakar was dealing in the business of fertilizers and seeds, and he was holding authorization of near about 20 companies for selling their products including the agricultural equipments. Even deceased Prabhakar had open a cash credit account within the limits of Rs.15,00,000/-, and the claimant has also produced the passbook to that effect marked as Exh.38/1 to 38/14. The appellant /claimant has also produced the audit report of business of deceased Prabhakar. The learned counsel submits that, the income of deceased Prabhakar from both the sources of Rs.10,000/- per month. Even though the extract of the profit and loss account and the balance-sheet of the relevant year are produced on record, the learned Tribunal has not considered the same in its proper perspective. The learned member of the Tribunal has not made any addition in the income of deceased Prabhakar towards his future prospects. The learned counsel submits that, considering the age of deceased Prabhakar at the time of his accidental death, addition to the extent of 15 % in his ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 ::: 3 FA.627-2001 income ought to have been made by the Tribunal towards future prospects. The learned counsel submits that, the Tribunal has awarded the less amount towards the medical expenses though the claimant has produced on record all the medical bills which are to the tune of Rs.1,61,946/-. The Learned Member of the Tribunal has also awarded meager amount towards loss of consortium. The learned counsel submits that, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards attendant charges, loss of estate and funeral expenses, the claimant is entitled for the same.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent/insurer submits that, as per the profit and loss account of the year 1996-97 (exh.35), which is just and prior to the accidental death of deceased Prabhakar, it appears that, deceased Prabhakar had earned the profit to the tune of Rs.59,848.66 Ps. In the said profit and loss account, the agriculture income is shown as Rs.3132.90 Ps. Only. The learned counsel submits that, P.W. Pradeep, the income tax practitioner, has also admitted in his cross-examination that, the son of deceased Prabhakar is running the business at present, and the firm which was running during lifetime of deceased Prabhakar is still running ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 ::: 4 FA.627-2001 after his death. The learned counsel submits that, even then the Tribunal has considered the earning of the deceased Prabhakar @ of Rs.4,000/- per month. The learned counsel submits that, earnings from the business and the agricultural source remained as it is, and there is no loss of income as such. The learned counsel submits that, after considering the documentary evidence, which is proved by the claimant, the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation, no interference required, so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned.
4. On careful perusal of the pleading, evidence and the impugned Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it appears that, the Tribunal has considered profit and loss account (exh.35) of the year 1996-1997. On perusal of the extract of profit and loss account (exh.35), it appears that, the net profit Rs.59,848.66 Ps. was earned during that period, and the income from the agriculture source was shown as Rs.3132.90 Ps. Furthermore, the audit report exh.50 and extract of the profit and loss of the subsequent year 1997-98 and 1998-99 shows the steady rise in the income from the business source. It is thus clear that, even after the death of ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 ::: 5 FA.627-2001 deceased Prabhakar, his son is efficiently running the business. However, the Tribunal has considered the loss at Rs.4,000/- per month due to the lack of supervision and skill in running business and the agriculture income on the part of deceased Prabhakar. It appears that, the learned member of the Tribunal has considered income of the deceased Prabhakar on some higher side, however considering the addition of the income towards future prospect, the said amount of loss in income to the tune of Rs.4,000/- appears to be just and reasonable. The learned Member of the Tribunal has however, committed the mistake in applying the multiplier '5' (five). Deceased Prabhakar met with an accidental death, at the age of 58 years. As per the ratio laid down in Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. The relevant multiplier for the age group of a person between 56 to 60 is '9' (nine). Thus the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of future income/dependency requires modification.
5. On careful perusal of the documents at exh.37 and 38, it appears that, the claimant has incurred the medical expenses to the tune of Rs.1,61,946/- rounded to Rs.1,62,000/-, ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 ::: 6 FA.627-2001 however the learned Member of the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- for medical treatment and also for lodging, special diet, attendant etc. The appellant/ claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.1,62,000/- separately towards the medical expenses and entitled for the amount of Rs.10,000/- each for lodging, special diet and attendant charges. The learned Tribunal has awarded only 10,000/- towards loss of consortium in view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajesh and others Vs. Rajbir Singh and others reported in reported in (2013) 9 Supreme Court Cases 54, The claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium. The claimant is also entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate, and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses.
6. In view of the above, the impugned Judgment and award requires modification.
7. Thus, the breakup of compensation under various heads awardable to the appellant/claimant which can be broadly categories as under :-
::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 :::
7 FA.627-2001
1) Loss of income/dependency Rs.2,88,000/-
(32,000 x 9 )
(as against Rs.1,60,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal)
2) Medical expenses Rs.1,62,000/-
3) Lodging expenses, special diet Rs.30,000/-
and attendant charges Rs.10,000/-
each
(the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- awarded towards medical expenses, lodging, special diet and attendant charges)
4) Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
(as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal)
5) Loss of estate Rs.10,000/-,
6) Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-,
--------------
The claimant is entitled for an amount Rs.6,05,000/-.
Hence, the following order.
ORDER
1. Appeal is hereby partly allowed with proportionate costs.
2. The Judgment and award passed by the Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hingoli, dated 5th May, 2001 in M.A.C.P.No.224/2000, is hereby modified in the following manner :- ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 :::
8 FA.627-2001
a] Respondent shall pay to the petitioner
compensation of Rs.6,05,000/- (six lakhs five thousand) including compensation towards no fault liability with proportionate costs with interest @ 9 % per annum, from the date of the claim petition, till its realization.
3. Rest of the Judgment and award stands confirmed.
4. Award be drawn up, as per above modification.
5. If any amount is paid, as per the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the same shall be the part of the award after modification.
6. Appeal is accordingly disposed of.
[ V. K. JADHAV, J.] ...
VJG/-
::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:52:08 :::