Latabai Subhash Kothari And Anr vs Bansi Bhikaji More And Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 1315 Bom

                                           1                  FA NO.290 OF 2013

                 
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY




                                                                           
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                   
                           FIRST APPEAL NO. 290 OF 2013


      1.       Latabai Subhash Kothari,




                                                  
               Age 52 years, Occu: Household work,

      2.       Reshma Subhash Kothari,
               Age 27 years, Occu: House work,




                                        
               Both r/o. Bhutkarwadi,
               in front of Sindhu Mangal Karyalaya,
                             
               Tq.Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar.

                                                    ...APPELLANTS
                                                    (Orig.Claimants)
                            
                       VERSUS

      1.       Bansi Bhikaji More,
               Age Major, Occu. Business,
      

               R/o Pimpalgaon, Ujjani,
               Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.
   



      2.       Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.Ltd.,
               Regd. Office Sundaram Towers,





               46, Whites Road, Royapeettah, Chennai 600 014

                                                    ...RESPONDENTS
                                                    (Orig.Opponents)
                                   ...
      Mrs. Manjusha S. Jagtap, Advocate for Appellants





      Mr. Avinash S. Deshpande, Advocate, for respondent no.2.
      Respondent no.1 served through paper publication.
                                   ...
                         CORAM : P.R. BORA, J.

Dated: April 07, 2016 ...

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

1. The original claimants have filed the present appeal

2 FA NO.290 OF 2013

(2) FA NO.290/2013

taking exception to the judgment and award passed in MACP

No.512/2010, decided on 23rd October, 2012, by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, at Ahmednagar. The only objection

raised by the appellant is in respect of application of a wrong

multiplier by the Tribunal while assessing the compensation.

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that

except the aforesaid objection, she is not pressing the other

objections raised in the appeal.

2. Learned Counsel Mr.A.S.Deshpande appearing for

the respondent Insurance Company sought to canvass that the

Tribunal has correctly applied multiplier of 9 taking into account

the age of the dependents and income of the deceased. The

submission made by Shri A.S. Deshpande, learned Counsel,

apparently, cannot be accepted in view of the law as is now

settled in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport

Corp.& Anr. ( AIR 2009 SC 3104 (1)).

3. On perusal of the judgment, it is revealed that the

Tribunal has applied multiplier of 9 based on the age of the

mother of the deceased, who was one of the claimants in the

3 FA NO.290 OF 2013

aforesaid claim petition, and has accordingly assessed the

compensation. The multiplier, as has been applied by the

Tribunal, is apparently incorrect in view of the judgment of the

Honourable Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (cited

supra), and other subsequent judgments, in which the ratio

laid down in Sarla Verma's case (cited supra) has been

followed.

4. ig Age of deceased Rahul was 27 years on the

date of the accident. There is no dispute as regards age of

deceased Rahul. As per his age, multiplier of 17 ought to have

been applied by the learned Tribunal. The Tribunal has,

however, applied multiplier of 9 and has accordingly determined

the amount of compensation. The mistake so committed by

the Tribunal requires to be rectified and to that extent the

impugned award needs to be modified.

5. The Tribunal has held the income of deceased

Rahul to the tune of Rs.18,000/- per annum for assessing the

amount of dependency compensation. By multiplying the said

income with the multiplier of 9 the Tribunal has fixed the

dependency compensation to the tune of Rs.1,62,000/- and has

also awarded the compensation under the other heads to the

4 FA NO.290 OF 2013

extent of Rs.18,000/-. The Tribunal has thus awarded total

compensation amounting to Rs.1,80,000/-. By applying the

proper multiplier i.e. of 17 to the amount of Rs.18,000/-, which

the Tribunal has held to be available with the deceased for to

be spent by him on the maintenance and for the welfare of his

dependents, the amount of dependency compensation comes to

Rs.3,06,000/- ( 18,000 x 17). Adding the amount of

Rs.18,000/-, as has been awarded by the Tribunal towards loss

of estate, funeral expenses, etc. in the aforesaid amount of

dependency compensation, the total compensation amount

comes to Rs.3,24,000/-. This is just and fair compensation

payable to the appellants i.e. original claimants. The amount

of compensation thus needs to be enhanced from Rs.1,80,000/-

to Rs.3,24,000/-.

Save and except the enhancement in the amount of

compensation as above, the other part of the impugned

judgment and award shall remain as it is. Modified award be

prepared accordingly. The appeal thus stands allowed to the

aforesaid extent.

( P.R. BORA, J. )

...

AGP/290-13fa