United India Insurance Company ... vs K.Gangubai And 7 Others

        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

                    M.A.C.M.A. No. 2105 of 2006


Judgment:

        This appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company

Limited against the award dated 14.06.2006 passed in OP No.2531 of

2002 by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Mahila Court-
cum-XIX Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad.

        The parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed
before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

      Since the quantum of compensation alone is in question in this
appeal, there is no need to discuss other aspects. As seen from the
record the deceased was aged about 35 years.            Therefore, the

appropriate multiplier is '15'. According to the claimants the deceased
was working as Hamali and earning Rs.5000/- to Rs.6000/- per

month. However, the Tribunal has taken his income at Rs.3,000/- per

month and after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses and

applying the multiplier '15' awarded Rs.3,60,000/- towards loss of
earnings. The Tribunal also awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- each

to the first claimant and the third respondent who are the wives of the

deceased towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- to the other

claimants. Thus, the Tribunal awarded total amount of Rs.4,05,000/-
but restricted the same to Rs.4,00,000/- as claimed by the claimants.

      Having regard to the latest judgments of the Apex Court, the wife

of the deceased is entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of

consortium. The claimants are also entitled to Rs.25,000/- towards
funeral expenses and Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of estate. If the same

is taken into consideration, the claimants will get more than the amount

awarded by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, I am of the considered
 view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and

reasonable and there is no need to interfere with the same.         The

appeal is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

      Accordingly, the MACMA is dismissed.           However, in the
circumstances, no costs.

      As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this

appeal shall stand closed.


                                               ___________________
                                            B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J.

Date: 21.10.2014 Nsr