Bombay High Court
Nagpur Bench: Nagpur vs 2] Rajbhushan on 8 October, 2012
Bench: M.N. Gilani
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY:
NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.456 of 2002.
APPELLANTS:
1] Chandrakala wd/o. Damodhar Lengure, Aged
about 35 years, Occupation : Household.
2] Raju s/o. Damodhar Lengure,Aged about 20 years,
Occupation : Student.
3] Ku. Kiran d/o. Damodhar Lengure, Aged about 16
years, Occupation : Education.
4] Vilas s/o. Damodhar Lengure, Aged about 14 years,
Occupation : Household.
Nos.3 & 4 - Minors, through their mother guardian
the appellant no.1.
All residents of Forest Colony, Chandrapur, Tahsil
and District Chandrapur.
[Original claimants on R.A]
VERSUS
1] Dinesh s/o. Rammanohar Tiwari, Aged about 35
years, Occupation : Driver, Resident of Guru Govind
Ward,Ballarpur, Tahsil and District Chandrapur.
(Deleted as per order dated 17.7.2002)
2] Rajbhushan s/o. Bienlal Jha, Aged about 51
years, Occupation : Transport, R/o. Gorakshan Ward,
Ballarpur, Tahsil and District Chandrapur.
3] National Insurance Company through its Branch
Manager, Near Jatpura Gate, Civil Lines, Chandrapur,
tahsil and district :Chandrapur.
[Original non applicants on R.A.]
==========================================
Mr. Rohit Sharma h/f Anand Parchure, adv. for appellant
Mr. C.A. Anthony, advocate for respondent no3.
==========================================
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:15:25 :::
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
2
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO.457 of 2002.
APPELLANTS:
1] Smt. Saraswatibai wd/o. Ganpatrao Domkawale,
Aged about 69 years, Occupation : Nil, R/o.
Rambag Forest Colony, Qtr. No.4, Chandrapur,
Tahsil and District Chandrapur. (deleted as per
order Court's order dated 16.4.2007).
2] Smt. Shobha wd/o. Ishwar Domkawale,Aged about
33 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Rambag
Forest Colony, Qtr. No.4, Chandrapur, Tahsil and
District Chandrapur.
3] Amar s/o. Ishwar Domkawale, Aged about 14 years,
Occupation : Student.
4] Ajay s/o. Ishwar Domkawale, Aged about 10 years,
Occupation : Student.
5] Ashwini d/o. Ishwar Domkawale, Aged about 10
years, Occupation : Student.
Nos.3 to 5 - Minors, through their mother guardian
the appellant no.2.
[Original claimants on R.A]
VERSUS
1] Rajbhushan s/o. Bainlal Jha, Aged about 51 years,
Occupation : Business, R/o. Gorakshan Ward,
Ballarpur, Tahsil and District Chandrapur.
2] Dinesh s/o. Rammanohar Tiwari, Aged about 30
years, Occupation : Driver, Guru Govind Ward,
Ballarpur, Tahsil and District Chandrapur. (Deleted as
per order dated 17.7.2002).
3] National Insurance Company, through its Branch
Manager, "Saket" Laxmibhavan Chowk,
Dharampeth, Nagpur, Tahsil and District Nagpur.
[Original Non applicant as on R.A.]
==========================================
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:15:25 :::
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
3
Mr. Rohit Sharma, h/fo Anand Parchure, adv. for appellant
Mr. C.A. Anthony, advocate for respondent no.3.
==========================================
CORAM: M.N. GILANI, J.
DATE: 8.10.2012
ORAL JUDGMENT:
First Appeal No.456/2002 is directed against the
judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal Chandrapur, in Claim Petition No.51/1998 dated
7.11.2001 and First Appeal No.457/2002 is directed against
the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur in Claim Petition No.11/1998
dated 8.11.2001. Both the appeals are in respect of death of
one Damodhar and Ishwar occurred in a motor vehicular
accident involving the jeep bearing registration No. MH-
31-G-9374 and truck bearing registration no MH-34-
A2933, occurred on 20.4.1997 on Chandrapur -
Brahmapuri Road.
2] The learned Tribunal held that the drivers of
both the vehicles i.e. the truck and jeep, were negligent and
apportioned the negligence in the ratio of 70:30. Deceased
Damodhar was found to be 39 years and 3 months old
when died and Ishwar was found to be 38 years of age. In a
claim case relating to death of Damodhar the Tribunal
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
applied multiplier of 10, whereas in case of claim relating
to death of Ishwar the Tribunal applied multiplier of 12. In
both these appeals the challenge is to the tribunal applying
wrong multipliers.
3] Mr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant contended that in view of the decision in case of
Sarla Verma (Smt) & Others ..vs.. Delhi Transport
Corporation & another reported in (2009)6 Supreme Court
Cases 121, there has to be an uniformity in applying
multiplier. According to him, multiplier provided under
second schedule ought to have been applied considering the
number of dependents left behind by the deceased, in both
the claim petitions.
4] Mr. Anthony, learned counsel appearing for
respondent no.3 submits that as per law prevailing at the
time when the accident occurred, choice of multiplier is
correct which need no interference.
5] The issue is covered by the decision in case of
Sarla Verma [cited supra] and this holds the field till date. It
was observed:
"We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used
should be as mentioned in Column (4) of the table
above (Prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative
multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21
to 25), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is
M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-
15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-
13 for 46-50 years, then reduced by two units for every
five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56
to 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to
70 years."
6] In this view of the matter, in both the appeals
the multiplier ought to have been 15. In that view of the
matter the total amount of compensation will have to be
recalculated as under:
In First Appeal No.456/2002 [M.A.C.P. No.51/1998],
the dependency was considered at Rs.29,100/- and after
applying multiplier of 10 it was calculated at Rs.2,91,000 it
was further reduced by 30% i.e. by Rs.87,300/- because of
the negligence of the deceased. Thus the total amount of
compensation was Rs.2,03,700/- [inclusive of no-fault-
liability of Rs.50,000/-.]
After applying multiplier of 15 amount of
compensation would be : [Rs. 29,100 X 15] 4,36,500. On
reducing 30% on account of contributory negligence
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
(Rs.1,30,950), it would come to Rs.3,05,550/- [inclusive of
no -fault liability amount of Rs.50,000/-]. On deducting no-
fault liability amount of Rs.50,000/-, the compensation
would be Rs.2,55,550/-.
The amount already awarded Rs.1,53,700/-, thus
claimants would be entitled to claim enhanced amount of
Rs.1,01,850/- which would carry interest at the rate of 7.5%
from the date of filing of the application till its realisation.
In First Appeal No.457/2002 [M.A.C.P. No.11/1998]
The amount calculated by the Tribunal was : An amount
of Rs. 23184 was taken as of loss of dependency x 12 =
2,78,208/- which was reduced by 30% and thus
compensation of Rs.1,94,746/- was granted. Rs. 50,000/-
was further deducted being the amount already awarded
towards no-fault liability . Total amount of award comes to
Rs.1,44,746/-, the compensation after applying multiplier
of 15 is : 23,184 X 15= 3,47,760 (-)30% =1,04,328 (-)
Rs.50,000/- towards no fault, thus compensation amount
would be Rs.2,43,123/-.
The claimants are already awarded an amount of
Rs.1,44,746/- by the tribunal.
Thus claimants would be entitled to claim additional
amount of Rs.98,386/- with interest @ 7.5 %% from the
081012FA456.02 + one.odt
date of filing of application till its realisation.
For the reasons stated above, both the appeals are
allowed partly.
Claimant - Sobha Domkawale shall be entitled to
additional amount of compensation of Rs.98386/- and -
Chandrakala Lengure shall be entitled to enhanced amount
of compensation of Rs. 1,01,850/- along with interest @
7.5 % p.a. from the date of filing of the application till
realization.
On deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall invest
the entire amount in the name of claimants - Chandrakala
wd/o Damodhar Lengure & Smt. Shobha Ishwar
Domkawale, respectively, in any nationalised bank
convenient to them with an arrangement that they shall
receive the monthly or quarterly interest accrued thereon
and after maturity of the deposit they shall be entitled to
receive the entire amount. This order be complied with
within 4 weeks from the date of deposit of the amount.
There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE
SMP.
