HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.862 of 2018
JUDGMENT:
Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Principal District Judge, Nizamabad in M.V.O.P. No. 96 of 2016, dated 07.12.2017, 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 petitioner, on 04.01.2016 at about 13-00 hours at Kanjar village, while the deceased Gadasandu Rajavva was waiting for bus, in the meantime one RTC bus bearing No. AP.29.Z.1315 came from Nizamabad being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and dashed her, due to which she fell down on the road and the bus ran over her, as a result of which, she sustained bleeding injuries and crush injuries all over the body and died on the spot. According to the petitioners, the deceased was aged 60 years, beedi roller and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Thus the petitioner is claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- against the respondent-The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. 2
4. Respondent-Corporation filed counter disputing the manner of accident, age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is further contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is excessive.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. Perused the material available on record.
6. Vide aforesaid order, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation along with proportionate costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization, to the appellant-claimant against the respondent-Corporation.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that although the claimant, by way of evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, and Exs.A.1 to A.5, established the fact that the death of the deceased-Rajavva was caused in a motor accident, the Tribunal awarded meager amount.
8. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-Corporation sought to sustain the impugned award 3 of the Tribunal contending that the Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
9. Admittedly, there is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident and the involvement of the offending vehicle i.e., RTC bus bearing No. AP.29.Z.1315. 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.
10. With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned, according to the petitioners, the deceased was aged 60 years, working as beedi roller and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month. But as per the postmortem examination report and inquest report, the deceased was aged 70 years. Thus, the tribunal has rightly considered the age of the deceased as 70 years. However, as the deceased was aged 70 years as on the date of accident, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, which appears to be very less. Therefore, this Court is inclined to take the income of the deceased as a beedi roller at Rs.4,500/- per month. As stated 4 above, the age of the deceased was 70 years as on the date of accident. Since the deceased left the petitioner as her dependant, 1/3rd of her income is to be deducted towards her personal and living expenses. Then the contribution of the deceased would be Rs.3,000/- (4,500 - 1,500 = 3,000) per month. Since the deceased was aged about 70 years at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation1 would be "5". Then the loss of dependency would be Rs.3,000/- x 12 x 5 = Rs.1,80,000/-. In addition thereto, under the conventional heads, the claimant is granted Rs.77,000/- as per the decision of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled for Rs.2,57,000/-.
11. With regard to the liability, as stated above, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending RTC Bus. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly held that the respondent-Corporation is liable to pay the compensation to the petitioner.
12. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal 1 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) 5 from Rs.1,50,000/- to Rs.2,57,000/-. 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 respondent- Corporation. 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, the claimant is 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 13.03.2023 pgp