Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 412 (JHR)

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. GEORGE MATHEW

2002-03-22

H.S.PRASAD, M.Y.EQBAL

body2002
Judgment : M. Y. EQBAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal, at the instance of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. , is directed against the judgment and award dated 21. 2. 1994 passed by Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, Bokaro in Title (M. V.) Suit No. 134 of 1992, whereby a sum of Rs. 3,50,000 has been awarded by way of compensation to the claimants on account of death of their son. The claimants, who are the parents, filed an application for grant of compensation for the death of their son Mathew George, who met with an accident on 19. 4. 1992 with the Ambassador car bearing registration no. BRI 3868 near Krishna More, Bokaro. ( 2 ) THE undisputed facts are that the deceased was aged 22 years and was a constable working in C. I. S. F. , Bokaro Steel limited, Bokaro. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was getting Rs. 1,541 as monthly salary at the time of his death. The Tribunal while assessing the quantum of compensation had deducted 50 per cent from the salary and the remaining 50 per cent, i. e. , Rs. 770 was taken as monthly dependency. The annual dependency was accordingly calculated at Rs. 9,240 and by multiplying it by 36 the compensation was calculated at Rs. 3,32,640. By adding some amount by way of consortium and loss of association, the total amount assessed was Rs. 3,50,000. ( 3 ) MR, Alok Lai, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, assailed the impugned award mainly on the ground that the Tribunal has committed serious error of law in taking 36 years of age while applying the multiplier theory. However, learned counsel very fairly conceded that instead of 50 per cent the Tribunal ought to have deducted only 1/3rd out of the total salary and then the monthly dependency should have been multiplied by a maximum of 11 years because the deceased left behind only the old parents. ( 4 ) ON the other hand, the respondentsclaimants filed their cross-objection for enhancement of compensation. Mr. M. S. Chhabra, learned counsel for the claimants, submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded additional compensation taking into consideration the future prospect of the deceased and his future promotion, deprivation of life and enjoyment. ( 4 ) ON the other hand, the respondentsclaimants filed their cross-objection for enhancement of compensation. Mr. M. S. Chhabra, learned counsel for the claimants, submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded additional compensation taking into consideration the future prospect of the deceased and his future promotion, deprivation of life and enjoyment. ( 5 ) IN our opinion, the first mistake, which was committed by the Tribunal, is in deducting 50 per cent from the salary for taking monthly dependency. As a matter of fact 1/3rd out of the salary ought to have been deducted and in that case the monthly dependency comes to Rs. 1,000 and the annual dependency comes to Rs. 12,000. The second mistake, which was committed by the Tribunal, is taking 36 years of age while assessing the compensation by applying multiplier theory. Although Mr. Lal contended that because the deceased left behind old parents, the maximum 11 years of age should have been taken but, we are of the opinion that Tribunal ought to have taken 18 years purchase while assessing the compensation. If 18 years of age is multiplied by annual dependency, the compensation amount comes to Rs. 2,16,000. However, we are of the view, that at least the Tribunal should have awarded compensation of Rs. 2,50,000. ( 6 ) WE are assessing this amount of rs. 2,50,000 as compensation because we are not inclined to interfere with interest portion of the award by which the Tribunal held that the awarded amount shall carry 12 per cent interest from the date of the application. In our opinion, the compensation of Rs. 2,50,000 together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of application, i. e. , from 1992 if assessed, the total amount, which shall come in the hand of the claimants is about Rs. 3,00,000 to rs. 3,50,000 which should be quite reasonable and adequate compensation particularly in view of the fact that the deceased died leaving behind only the old parents. ( 7 ) WE, therefore, reduce compensation amount from Rs. 3,50,000 to Rs. 2,50,000 but direct the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. to calculate the entire interest on the amount of Rs. 2,50,000 from 1992 till it was paid or shall be paid to the claimants. The rest of the amount, if any, shall be released in favour of the claimants within two months from today. 3,50,000 to Rs. 2,50,000 but direct the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. to calculate the entire interest on the amount of Rs. 2,50,000 from 1992 till it was paid or shall be paid to the claimants. The rest of the amount, if any, shall be released in favour of the claimants within two months from today. Appeal allowed. --- *** --- .