THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
MA.CMA.NO.3027 OF 2014
JUDGMENT
Not being satisfied with the compensation granted by the court of the Chairman, MACT - cum - Principal District Judge, Adilabad in MVOP.No.140 of 2010, dated 1.4.2014, the claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. The deceased is one Purmani Raju and the claimants are his wife, minor children and mother.
3. The case of the claimants is that on 24.5.2009 at about 9.30 p.m., when the deceased was driving auto rickshaw bearing No. AP 1 V 3807 from Ramnagar to Collector Chowk Adilabad, and on the way, a lorry bearing No. MH 26 B 7477 came in opposite direction on wrong side and dashed the auto, due to which the auto was completely damaged and the deceased sustained injuries and he was shifted to RIMS, Adilabad and he died while undergoing treatment. The Traffic Police, Adilabad, registered a case against the lorry driver in Cr.No.31 of 2009 for the offence under Section 304-A IPC.
4. The further case of the claimants is that the deceased was aged 25 years, and was hale and healthy at the time of accident, and prior to the 2 accident he was earning an amount of Rs.3,300/- per month by working as driver of the auto, and because of his premature death, they lost their source of income. Hence, they filed claim petition under Section 163-A of the Act, claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.
5. The owner of the lorry remained ex parte, and the 2nd respondent, who is the insurer of the crime auto, filed counter affidavit and contested the claim.
6. The Tribunal considering the evidence of P.W.1, and also the evidence of P.W.2, who is an eye witness to the accident, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-5, recorded finding of fact that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and that the deceased died due to the injuries sustained in the accident.
7. Further taking the income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- per month and by deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses and by applying the multiplier of 18, granted an amount of Rs.3,24,000/- towards loss of dependency. Further, the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.15,000/- to the 1st claimant towards loss of consortium, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.10,000/- towards transport charges. Thus, in all granted an amount of Rs.3,74,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. 3
8. As stated above, not being satisfied with the compensation granted by the Tribunal, the claimants are before this court.
9. Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy learned counsel for the claimants and Smt. P.Satya Manjula, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent - insurer.
10. In the present case, as already noted above, there is no dispute with regard to the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the crime lorry and that the decease died in the accident and there is also no dispute that the policy of the crime vehicle was in force as on the date of the accident. It is to be further seen that though the claim petition is filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, since the accident is found to have occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, the claimants are entitled to compensation under Section 166 of the Act, and the Tribunal has also awarded compensation under the said provision and hence no interfere is warranted in this regard.
11. The deceased is found to be aged 25 years as per Exs.A-2 and A-3 and the case of the claimants is that the deceased by driving auto was earning an amount of Rs.3,300/- per month. In fact the amount claimed by the claimants is very reasonable and hence, having regard to the facts 4 and circumstances of the case and the avocation of the deceased, I am inclined to take the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,500/- and Rs.42,000/- per annum.
12. As per the judgment of the Apex Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY vs. PRANAY SETHI1, for the age group of the deceased, an addition of 40% has to be made to the established income of the deceased. 40% of Rs.42,000/- comes to Rs.16,800/-. Thus the annual income of the deceased including future prospects comes to Rs.58,800/-.
13. The number of dependants of the deceased are four in number and hence as per the judgment of the Apex Court in SARLA VARMA vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION2, deduction towards living and personal expenses shall be at the rate of 1/4th. If 1/4th is deducted from Rs.58,800/-, the income that the deceased would be contributing to his family comes to Rs.44,100/-. The appropriate multiplier to the age group of the deceased as per the same judgment of the Apex Court is '18' Thus the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.7,93,800/- (Rs.44,100/- x 18 Rs.7,93,800/-).
1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 2 (2009)6 SCC 121 5
14. As per the judgment of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case (supra), the claimants are entitled to Rs.77,000/- towards conventional heads. The amount granted by the Tribunal under these heads is accordingly modified.
15. Further, the claimants 2 and 3 are minors as on the date of the accident and hence as per the judgment of the Apex Court in MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. NANU RAM3, they are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of parental consortium. Thus, under this head, claimants 2 and 3 are entitled to Rs.80,000/-.
16. Thus, the amount of Rs.3,74,000 granted by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.9,50,800/- (Rs.7,93,800/- + Rs.77,000/- + Rs.80,000/- = Rs.9,50,800/-) with interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization and the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.
17. The apportionment of compensation among the claimants shall be in the same ratio as ordered by the Tribunal. Further, the deposit of amount in nationalized bank and its withdrawal, shall also be as ordered by the Tribunal.
3 (2018)18 SCC 130 6
18. The claimants shall pay the deficit court. Any amount already deposed by the insurance company shall be given credit to. The compensation shall be deposed by the insurance company within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
19. The appeal is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.
20. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
----------------------------------------------
M.G.PRIYADARSINI,J DATE:24--11--2022 AVS