THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.1131 of 2017
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is preferred by the claimants, questioning the award and decree dated 25.01.2017 in M.V.O.P.No.1468 of 2014 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of one R.Bhaskara Rao, son of claimant Nos.1&2, brother of claimant No.3 (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased"), who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 16.04.2014. According to the claimants, on the fateful day, while the deceased was getting down from the APSRTC bus bearing No.AP 11Z 7379 at S.R.Nagar Bus stop, the driver of the said bus, suddenly drove the bus without noticing the deceased and due to the sudden motion of bus at high speed, the deceased fell down on the road and the bus wheels ran over the deceased and he sustained injuries all over the body and died on spot. According to the claimants, the deceased was aged 22 years, working as driver and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Therefore, they filed the claim petition against the respondents claiming compensation of Rs.10.00 lakhs towards compensation under different heads.
2
MGP, J MACMA.No.1131 of 2017
3. Before the tribunal, the respondent Nos.1 and 2, filed counter denying the manner in which the accident took place, including the age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is also stated that the quantum of compensation claimed is excessive, baseless and prayed to dismiss the petition.
4. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whether the pleaded accident had occurred resulting in death of the deceased, R. Bhaskara Rao, due to the rash and negligent driving of the RTC Bus bearing No.AP 11 Z 7379, by its driver?
2. Whether the claimants are entitled to any compensation and, if so, at what quantum and what is the liability of the respondents?
3. To what relief?
5. In order to prove their case, PWs.1 & 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked.
6. Considering the claim, counter filed and the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the negligent driving of the APSRTC Bus by its driver and accordingly awarded an amount of Rs.5,42,000/- with interest at 9% per annum payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants filed the present appeal.
3
MGP, J MACMA.No.1131 of 2017
7. Heard both sides and perused the record.
8. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that the claimants have established that the deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by working as driver but the Tribunal has erroneously took the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month, which is a meager amount.
9. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2, has contended that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
10. The finding of the Tribunal with regard to the manner in which the accident took place has become final as the same is not challenged by either of the respondents.
11. In so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, according to the claimants, the deceased was aged about 22 years and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month by working as driver. But no evidence is produced, either oral or documentary, to prove his income or avocation. However, considering the age of the deceased and as the accident is of the year 2014, this Court is inclined to fix the income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month. Since the deceased was aged about 22 years, the claimants are entitled to addition of 40% towards future prospects, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 4 MGP, J MACMA.No.1131 of 2017 National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others1. Therefore, monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.8,400/- (Rs.6,000/- + Rs.2,400/-). Since the deceased was bachelor, after deducting 50% towards personal and living expenses of the deceased therefrom, the net monthly contribution of the deceased to the family comes to Rs.4,200/-(Rs.8,400 - Rs.4,200 = Rs.4,200). As the age of the deceased was 22 years at the time of the accident, the appropriate multiplier is '18' as per the decision reported in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation2. Adopting multiplier 18, his total loss of dependency comes to Rs.9,07,200/- (Rs.4,200/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.9,07,200). The claimants are also entitled to Rs.33,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, as per Pranay Sethi's case (supra). Moreover, as per the decision of the Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others3, the claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium. Thus, in all the claimants are entitled to Rs.10,20,000/- towards just compensation. Insofar as the interest is concerned, the claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum on the compensation awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition till realization.
1 2017 ACJ 2700 2 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 MGP, J MACMA.No.1131 of 2017
12. Accordingly, M.A.C.M.A. is allowed. The compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.5,42,000/- to Rs.10,20,200/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the O.P. till the date of realization. The enhanced amount shall be apportioned in the manner as ordered by the Tribunal. Time to deposit the entire compensation is two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The claimant shall pay the deficit court fee. On such deposit of Court fee, the major claimants are entitled to withdraw their respective share amounts without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 21.02.2023 gms 6 MGP, J MACMA.No.1131 of 2017 137 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A. No.1131 of 2017 21.02.2023 gms