Bombay High Court
Ranubai Narsingrao Patil vs Chandrakant Kishanrao Jagtap on 18 March, 2016
Bench: V.K. Jadhav
fa170.03
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 170 OF 2003
1) Smt. Ranubai W/o Narsingrao Patil
Age 41 years, Occupation nil,
2) Sudarshan S/o Narsingrao Patil
Age 18 years, Occupation Education,
3) Vijay S/o Narsingrao Patil
Age 17 years, Occupation Education,
Through his mother-natural guardian
i.e. Appellant No.1.
4) Amol s/o Narsingrao Patil
Age 13 years, Occupation Education,
Through his mother-natural guardian
i.e. Appellant No.1
All r/o Killari, Taluka Ausa,
District Latur. ... Appellants
Versus
1) Chandrakant S/o Kishanrao Jagtap
Age 43 years, Occupation Agriculture,
R/o Kumtha, Taluka Ausa,
District Latur.
2) Dilipkumar Kishanrao Jadhav
Age 42 years, Occupation Agriculture,
R/o Kumtha, Taluka Ausa,
District Latur.
3) The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Through its Branch Manager,
Branch Office Chandranagar,
Latur. ... Respondents
.....
Advocate for the appellants : Mr. B. R. Kedar
Advocate for respondent No.3-insurer : Mr. S. G. Chapalgaonkar
.....
::: Uploaded on - 21/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:30:15 :::
fa170.03
-2-
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATED : 18th MARCH, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by
learned Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur dated 17 th
July, 2002 in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 258 of 1999, the
appellants-original claimants have preferred this appeal to the extent
of quantum of compensation.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :
On 18.01.1999, deceased Narsing Patil was returning to village
Killari by Motorcycle from Ausa Court. He was pillion rider on the
said motor cycle. On the way, the rider-respondent No.2 could not
control the vehicle and resultantly, accident had taken place, in
consequence of which, deceased Narsing sustained head injury and
he died on the way to Rural Hospital, Killari. The appellants-original
claimants filed MACP No. 258 of 1999 for grant of compensation
under various heads. Learned Member of MACT, Latur, by impugned
judgment and award dated 17th July, 2002, partly allowed the claim
petition and thereby directed respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to pay amount
of Rs. 4,32,000/- with proportionate costs of the petition with interest
at the rate of 9% per annum. Being aggrieved by the same, the
fa170.03
original claimants have preferred this appeal to the extent of the
quantum of compensation on the ground that the tribunal has not
correctly taken into consideration the salary drawn by deceased at
the time of his death and the tribunal has not awarded compensation
under non-pecuniary heads. The award is also challenged on the
ground that the tribunal has applied incorrect multiplier in this case.
Hence this appeal.
3.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that deceased
Narsing was serving as Police Head Constable at Killari Police
Station on monthly salary of Rs. 6564/-. Learned counsel submits
that the tribunal has considered only the net salary of deceased, and
accordingly, calculated the compensation. Learned counsel submits
that the deceased Narsing was 42 years old at the time of his death.
However, the tribunal has erroneously applied the multiplier as 10
instead of 14. Learned counsel further submits that the tribunal has
not awarded compensation for the non-pecuniary loss such as 'Loss
of Consortium', 'Loss of love and Affection' and also 'Funeral
Expenses'
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that even the
tribunal has committed error while deducting 1/3 rd amount of total
earning of deceased on the count of his personal expenses. Learned
counsel submits that the tribunal should have deducted 1/4 th amount
fa170.03
from his total earning as personal expenses because there are three
minor claimants and one widow dependent upon his earning at the
time of his death.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-insurer submits that the
tribunal has correctly assessed the compensation and no
interference is called for. Learned counsel submits that the appeal is
thus, liable to be dismissed with costs. Learned counsel submits
that, as per the award passed by the tribunal, the respondent-insurer
has deposited the entire amount along with interest before the
tribunal.
6. The following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded my findings to those points for the reasons given below :
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the tribunal has correctly In the negative.
assessed the compensation?
2. Whether the impugned judgment and In the affirmative.
award calls for interference?
3. What order ? As per final order.
fa170.03
REASONS
7. It is not disputed that deceased Narsing has died as a result of
accident while riding on motorcycle bearing registration No. MH-24-
2185 and the said accident occurred because of rash and negligent
driving of respondent No.2.
8. So far as the occupation of deceased Narsing is concerned,
the same is also not disputed. Deceased Narsing was serving as
Police Head Constable at the time of his death and he was getting
salary of Rs.6564/- per month. As per the evidence adduced before
the trial court, deceased Narsing had drawn last monthly salary of
Rs.6564/-. The salary certificate is produced on record and the same
is proved and marked Exh.38. On careful perusal of the same, it
appears the deduction on the count of Professional Tax amounting to
Rs.60 cannot be considered, however, the remaining salary to the
tune of Rs.6500/- is required to be considered for assessing
compensation in the present case. Learned Member of the MACT
has committed grave error while considering net salary of deceased
Narsing.
9. Learned Member of the tribunal has also committed error in
considering the multiplier 10 instead of 14.
fa170.03
10. So far as the award of compensation under the non-pecuniary
loss is concerned, it appears that the tribunal has not awarded any
compensation under the heads of 'Loss of Estate', 'Loss of Love and
Affection' and 'Funeral Expenses'. In view of this, the claimants are
entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- for Loss of Estate, Rs.15,000/-
for Loss of Consortium, Rs.10,000/- each, for the minor claimants
under the head 'Loss of Love and Affection' and Rs.10,000/- for
Funeral Expenses.
11. The tribunal has also committed mistake while deducting 1/3 rd
amount on the count of personal expenses instead of deduction of
1/4th amount. If the gross salary is considered as Rs.6,500/-, that
corresponds to Rs.78,000/- per annum and if 1/4 th deduction on the
count of personal expenses is considered, then 'Loss of Dependency'
comes to Rs.58,500/-. On application of multiplier of 14, the total
amount of compensation under the head of 'Loss of
Dependency/Income' comes to Rs.8,19,000/-. In addition to this, the
claimants are also entitled for an amount, as discussed above, under
the heads of non-pecuniary losses.
12. In view of the above discussion, the breakup of compensation
can be broadly categorized as under :
fa170.03
1. Loss of Dependency/Income Rs.8,19,000/-
2. Loss of Estate Rs.10,000/-
3. Loss of Consortium Rs.15,000/-
4. Loss of Love and Affection Rs.30,000/-
(Rs.10,000/- each for minor claimant Nos. 2 to 4)
5. Funeral Expenses
ig Rs.10,000/-
TOTAL Rs.8,84,000/-
13. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled for total
compensation of Rs.8,84,000/- (Rupees Eight Lacs Eight Four
Thousand only). I accordingly answer the Point No.1 in the negative
and Point No. 2 in the affirmative. In the result, I proceed to pass the
following order.
ORDER
I. The First Appeal is hereby partly allowed with proportionate
costs.
II. The impugned order dated 17th July, 2002 passed by
learned Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur
in MACP No.258 of 1999 is modified in the following way;
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 jointly and severally do pay an
amount of Rs.8,84,000/- with proportionate costs of petition
fa170.03
with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of
petition till realization of the entire amount.
III. Rest of the judgment and order passed by the tribunal
stands confirmed.
IV. Award be drawn up accordingly.
V. The amount already deposited by the respondent-insurer
before the tribunal shall be deducted from the
compensation as per the modified award passed by this
Court.
VI. First Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
( V. K. JADHAV, J.)
...
vre/-
