Shivram Ramaji Kokare & Anr vs Riyazuddin R Shaikh & Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 6068 Bom

                                           1                           931 fa 492.05.odt



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                                         
                               FIRST APPEAL NO. 492 OF 2005




                                                 
    1.      Shivram Ramaji Kokare,
            Age: 67 years, Occ: Agri.,
            R/o Murshadpura, Tq. Ashti,
            Dist. Beed.




                                                
    2.      Housabai Shivram Kokare,
            Age: 62 years, Occ: Household,
            R/o Murshadpura, Tq. Ashti,




                                        
            Dist. Beed.
            Both the appellants have died
            through L.Rs.
                             
            Ramchandra s/o Shivram Kokare,
            Age: 42 years, Occ: Service,
                            
            R/o Mushadpur, Tq. Ashti,
            Dist. Beed.                                  ...       Appellant

                     Vs.
      


    1.      Riyazuddin R. Shaikh,
   



            Age: Major, Occ: Transport Business,
            R/o 1st Floor, R.M. House,
            Jama Masjid Lane, Khorani Road,
            Sakinaka, Mumbai - 72.





    2.    New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
          through Branch Manager,
          Branch Office, Beed.                    ...     Respondents
                                     ----
    Mr. V.M. Chate, Advocate for the Appellant.





    Mrs. A.N. Ansari, Advocate for the respondent no.1.
    Mr. Dhananjay Deshpande, Advocate for respondent no.2.
                                     ----
                                        CORAM : P.R. BORA, J.

                                        DATE    : 15-10-2016.

    ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. The present appeal is filed seeking enhancement in the

amount of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Beed in M.A.C.P. No. 174 of 2001 decided on 26.10.2004.

2 931 fa 492.05.odt

2. Though, in the memo of appeal several grounds of

objection are raised in exception to the impugned judgment and

award. During the course of the argument, the learned counsel

appearing for the appellant, pressed into service only two grounds

in exception to the impugned award first that, the tribunal has

grossly erred in applying the multiplier of 7 when having regard to

the age of the deceased to be 26 years appropriate multiplier could

have been of 17. Another ground which is pressed by the learned

counsel is in respect of the meager amount awarded by the tribunal

towards non-pecuniary damages. The learned counsel, therefore,

has prayed for enhancing the amount of compensation under the

aforesaid heads and to modify the impugned award to the aforesaid

extent.

3. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for the

insurance company has supported the impugned judgment and

submitted that no interference is warranted in the impugned

judgment and award. Mrs. Ansari, learned counsel appearing for

respondent no.1 has prayed for passing appropriate orders.

4. It is not in dispute that, the age of deceased was 26

years. On perusal of the judgment, it is revealed that, the learned

Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 7 while determining the

amount of compensation. There is, therefore, substance in the

objection raised on behalf of the appellant. Having regard to the

3 931 fa 492.05.odt

age of the deceased the appropriate multiplier would be of 17. The

mistakes so committed by the tribunal needs to be corrected. As

held by the tribunal the annual dependency of the original-

petitioners on the income of deceased was to the tune of Rs.

16,008/- The said amount is to be multiplied by 17 so as to

determine the amount of dependency compensation which comes to

Rs. 2,72,136/-. The tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/-

each for loss of love and affection and Rs. 10,000/- for funeral

expenses.

The compensation so awarded by the tribunal is

certainly inadequate. I deem it appropriate to enhance the said

amount to Rs. 60,000/-. The petitioners are, thus, held entitled for

the total compensation of Rs. 3,32,136/-

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to

me that, the compensation as aforesaid would be the just and fair

compensation payable to the petitioners. The amount of

compensation is enhanced to the aforesaid extent. The impugned

award be modified accordingly. The applicants are entitled to

interest on the aforesaid enhanced amount of compensation @

7.5% interest per annum from the date of application till

realisation. Appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms.

(P.R. BORA) JUDGE

mub