HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
M.A.C.M.A.No.502 of 2008
and
Cross-Objection Appeal No.15443 of 2008
COMMON JUDGMENT :
The appeal is arising out of the order dated 20.09.2007, in
O.P.No.1702 of 2003 on the file of Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad. For the
sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as in the OP.
2. The appeal is filed by the Insurance Company i.e. respondent
No.2 in the O.P. The O.P. is filed before the Tribunal under Section 166(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- for the death of one Pendigamu Premanandam in the accident occurred on 20.10.2003 at Armoor village.
3. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, has come to a conclusion that the claimants are entitled for a compensation of Rs.4,60,600/- with proportionate costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum and apportioned the said 2 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 amount amongst the claimants. Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance Company has preferred this appeal.
4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
5. It is relevant to mention that this matter was referred to Lok Adalat at the instance of the appellant/Insurance Company and an award was passed on 11.12.2021 permitting the Insurance Company to withdraw the appeal with a direction to deposit the amount within one month from the date of the award and the claimants were permitted to withdraw their shares as apportioned by the Tribunal.
6. It is also pertinent to mention that the cross-objections were filed by the claimants in this appeal vide Cross-Objections Appeal No.15443 of 2008, seeking to grant more compensation.
7. Though the appeal has been withdrawn by way of award, the cross-objections which are filed by the claimants can be treated as cross-appeal of the claimants. It is also important to note that 3 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 in spite of the award passed by the Lok Adalat, the MACMA is not disposed of by this Court till date.
8. It is the contention of the claimants that the Tribunal ought to have considered the income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- per month as a Pastor in the Church and also ought to have applied the multiplier '14' instead of '9', as the age of the deceased at the time of the accident was 40 years.
9. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, it is evident that as per Ex.A-11/Certificate issued by Rev.P.Shadrach on behalf of Jesus Loves Full Gospel Ministries, the deceased Premanand was the Pastor of the said Church from 1988 to 2006 and his salary was fixed as Rs.1,500/- per month and apart from the salary, the deceased used to get Rs.600/- per month towards delivering of religious speeches in different villages, and thus, he used to earn a total amount of Rs.6,300/- per month.
10. In view of the above certificate, this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of 4 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 the deceased as Rs.6,300/- per month. Though it is contended by PW-1 in her evidence that the income of the deceased is Rs.10,000/- per month, it cannot be considered, in view of the oral evidence of PW-3 and documentary evidence i.e. Ex.A-11 placed before the Tribunal by the claimants themselves. Hence, the income of the deceased can be taken into consideration as Rs.6,300/- per month.
11. On perusal of the documentary evidence, it is evident from Ex.A-2 as well as Ex.A-5, that the age of the deceased was mentioned as 40 years, but as per Ex.A-10, which is the certificate issued by PW-3, the age of the deceased is 46 years. Moreover, Ex.A-12/the identity card issued by the Election Commission of India disclose that the deceased was aged 40 years as on 01.01.1995 and if that is taken into consideration, the age of the deceased as on the date of accident which occurred in the year 2003, would be 48 years. However, it is pertinent to mention that the Tribunal has considered the age of the deceased as 45 years, which is not at all disputed by the Insurance Company. Hence, the 5 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 age of the deceased is considered as 45 years. But, the Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier '9' instead of '14'. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation & another1, for the age group of 40 to 45 years, the multiplier applicable is '14'.
12. On perusal of the order of the Tribunal, it is evident that the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.4,53,600/- towards loss of dependency and also awarded further amounts of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.5,000/- under other heads, which are not specified in the award, and thus, granted total compensation of Rs.4,60,600/-.
13. As discussed above, the age of the deceased is taken as 45 years and his income is taken as Rs.6,300/- per month and the annual income would come to Rs.75,600/-. As per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & others2, if 25% of future prospects is added, it would come to Rs.94,500/- (Rs.75,600 + Rs.18,900/-). If 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, his 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 2 2017 ACJ 2700 6 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 contribution to the family would come to Rs.63,000/- (Rs.94,500 - Rs.31,500). If multiplier '14' is applied, it would come to Rs.8,82,000/- (Rs.63,000 X 14). Therefore, the claimants are entitled to Rs.8,82,000/- towards loss of dependency.
14. The first and second claimants are the wife and daughter of the deceased respectively. Claimants 1 and 2 are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and another Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate.
15. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation under the following heads:
1. Loss of dependency Rs.8,82,000/-
2. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
3. Consortium (Rs.40,000/- each) Rs.80,000/-
4. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
TOTAL Rs.9,92,000/-
16. Accordingly, the Cross-objections of the claimants is allowed, granting a total compensation of Rs.9,92,000/- with costs and interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Both the claimants are equally entitled 7 GAC, J MACMA.No.502 of 2008 and Cross-Obj.Appeal No.15443 of 2008 for the said compensation. Taking into consideration that the accident occurred in the year 2003, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount along with costs and interest only on payment of deficit Court fee.
17. Accordingly, the orders of the Tribunal in MVOP.No.1702 of 2003, dated 20.09.2007 stands modified, and MACMA.No.502 of 2008 stands disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J Date: 16.09.2022 ajr