HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.874 of 2018
JUDGMENT:
Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Nalgonda in O.P. No. 570 of 2013, dated 02.06.2016, the present appeal is filed by the claimants.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. According to the petitioners, on 19-06-2013 the deceased-Linga Swamy along with Ch.Padma went to Kamineni Hospital, Narketpally, on the motorcycle bearing No. AP.24.AJ.8598 to console the relative of Padma, and thereafter they were returning home on the same motorcycle and when they were crossing the road at Y junction at Kamineni Hospital, Narketpally, meanwhile, one car bearing No. AP.09.CM.0777 being driven by its driver came in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, towards Vijayawada side and dashed the motorcycle of the deceased. As a result of which, the deceased Linga Swamy sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot, while the pillion rider Padma sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to Kamineni Hospital, 2 Narketpally. The matter was reported to the Police. According to the petitioners, the deceased was quite hale and healthy, and was aged about 25 years and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month as an employee in Jadala Ramalingeswara Temple, Chervugattu, Nalgonda District. On account of the death of the deceased, petitioners became destitute and they are facing lot of difficulties in maintaining them. Thus, they are claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- under various heads against the respondents No.1 and 2, owner and insurer of the car bearing No. AP.09.CM.0777, jointly and severally.
4. Respondent No.1 not filed any counter.
5. Respondent No.2 filed counter disputing the manner of accident, age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is further contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioners is excessive.
6. On considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.5,72,000/- towards compensation to the appellants-claimants against the respondents herein who are owner and insurer of the offending vehicle, jointly and severally, along with proportionate costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
3
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2-Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited. Perused the material available on record.
8. The learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has submitted that although the claimants, by way of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.A.1 to A.7, established the fact that the death of the deceased-Mote Linga Swamy was caused in a motor accident, the Tribunal awarded meager amount.
9. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that the Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
10. Admittedly, there is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident and the involvement of the offending vehicle i.e., car bearing No.AP 09 CM 0777. However, the Tribunal after evaluating the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 coupled with the documentary evidence available on record, rightly held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 4
11. With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned, according to the petitioners, the deceased is an employee in Parvathi Jadala Ramalingeshwara Temple and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. To prove the income of the deceased, PW-3 who is the Junior Assistant in Cheruvugattu Devastanam deposed that the deceased Lingaswamy worked as Sweeper in the Temple from 1-2-2009 till his death and that he was paid a consolidated amount of Rs.5,000-00 per month and if the deceased Mote Linga Swamy was alive, his job would became permanent and he would get an amount of Rs.15,000-00 as salary, if his job becomes permanent. However, there is no record to show the income of the deceased. Moreover, his job is not permanent. Therefore, considering the evidence of PW-3, the tribunal has rightly taken the salary of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month. But the tribunal did not consider the future prospects. In light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others1, the claimants are also entitled to the future prospects and since the deceased was aged about 25 years at the time of accident, 40% of the income is added towards future prospects. Then it comes to Rs.7,000/- (5,000 + 2,000 = 7,000). Since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% of his income is to be deducted towards his personal and living 1 2017 ACJ 2700 5 expenses. Then the contribution of the deceased would be Rs.3,500/- (7,000 - 3,500 = 3,500) per month. Since the deceased was aged about 25 years at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation2 would be "18". Then the loss of dependency would be Rs.3,500/- x 12 x 18 =Rs.7,56,000/-. In addition thereto, under the conventional heads, the claimants are granted Rs.33,000/- as per the decision of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi (supra). Further the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are also entitled to filial consortium at Rs.40,000/- each as per the Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram3. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled for Rs.8,69,000/-.
11. With regard to the liability, as stated above, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle i.e., car bearing No.AP 09 CM 0777 and it was insured with the second respondent under Ex.B1 covering the date of accident. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly held that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners. 2 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) 3 2018 Law Suit (SC) 904 6
12. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.5,72,000/- to Rs.8,69,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, to be payable by the respondents jointly and severally. The amount of compensation shall be apportioned among the appellants-claimants in the ratio as ordered by the Tribunal. The amount shall be deposited within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit of compensation amount by the respondents, the claimants are at liberty to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 12.04.2023 pgp