Bombay High Court
Popat Patilba Patare And Another vs Satish Kundlik Pawar And Others on 8 December, 2021
Bench: R. G. Avachat
34-FA.1956.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.1956 OF 2015
1. Popat s/o. Patilba Patare
2. Smt. Mangal w/o. Popat Patare ..Appellants
Vs.
1. Satish s/o. Kundlik Pawar
2. Anil s/o. Kakasaheb Sonawane
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. ..Respondents
----
Mr.A.C.Darandale, Advocate for appellants
Mr.Parikshit Mantri, Advocate h/f. Mr.Parag Barde, Advocate for
respondent no.1
Mr.A.G.Choudhari, Advocate for respondent no.3
----
CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.
DATE : DECEMBER 08, 2021
ORDER :-
This is an appeal for enhancement of compensation
granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shrirampur, vide
judgment and award dated 31.01.2013 in Motor Accident Claim
Petition No.256 of 2009 on account of death in vehicular accident.
2. The appellants are parents of deceased, a 17 years Science
stream student. The Tribunal considered his income notionally at
Rs.3,000/-, applied multiplier considering the age of the parents and
granted compensation of Rs.2,95,000/-.
2 34-FA.1956.15
3. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the
deceased had a bright career. He would submit that the notional
income of the deceased should have been considered at least, at
Rs.5,000/- per month. According to him, multiplier should have
been applied considering the age of the deceased and not of his
parents. He would further submit that nothing has been awarded
towards future prospects and under conventional heads as well. He,
therefore, urged for reworking of the amount of compensation in
view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the cases of (i) National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and ors., (2017)16
SCC 680; and (ii) Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu
Ram alias Chuhru Ram and ors., (2018)18 SCC 130.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company
would, on the other hand, strongly oppose enhancement of the
amount of compensation. He would submit that what has been
awarded, is just and reasonable. The deceased was 11 th standard
student. No one could predict about his future, although he might
have scaled the heights. He, therefore, urged for dismissal of the
appeal.
3 34-FA.1956.15
5. Considered the submissions. Gone through the impugned
award. The record indicates that the deceased had a very good
academic performance. He died at the age of 17. In view of this
Court, his notional income at Rs.3,000/- considered by the Tribunal,
appears to be somewhat on lower side. This Court is, therefore,
inclined to consider it at Rs.4,000/- per month. As such, the annual
income of the deceased would come to Rs.48,000/-. Forty percent
thereof is added towards future prospects. As such, the amount
would come to Rs.67,200/- (Rs.48,000 + Rs.19,200/-). Since he
died bachelor, 50% thereof is subtracted towards his living
expenses. This way, the loss of annual dependency would come to
Rs.33,600/-. Considering the age of the deceased, multiplier of 18
is applied. As such, the amount on account of loss of dependency
would come to Rs.6,04,800/-.
6. The appellants are also granted a sum of Rs.40,000/-
each towards loss of love and affection besides a sum of Rs.30,000/-
towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. No interest pendente
lite is awarded on this amount. As such, the total amount of
compensation would come to Rs.7,14,000/- (Rs.6,04,000/- +
Rs.1,10,000/-).
4 34-FA.1956.15
7. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed partly in
terms of the following order:-
(i) The appeal partly succeeds.
(ii) The amount of compensation is enhanced from
Rs.2,95,000/- to Rs.7,14,000/-. The rate of interest is
scaled down from 9% per annum to 6% per annum.
(iii) The amount of compensation i.e. Rs.1,10,000/- shall not
carry interest pendente lite i.e. from the date of the
claim petition to the date of this order.
[R.G. AVACHAT, J.]
KBP
