Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 249 (GAU)

Sangeeta Das v. Union of India

2004-04-01

P.P.NAOLEKAR, RANJAN GOGOI

body2004
JUDGMENT P.P. Naolekar, J. 1. The deceased Ranadhir Das met with an accident on 20.9.1995. At the relevant point of time, the deceased was in the profession of Chartered Accountant. The claim petition was filed in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup, Guwahati by the deceased's wife, son, father and mother. After trial of the proceeding, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has assessed the age of the deceased at the time of the accident to be 35 years and his income as Chartered Accountant at Rs.8,750. After deducting one-third of the amount for the expenses incurred on the deceased himself, the Court reached to the figure at Rs.70,008 as the amount available yearly for spending towards the dependants. The Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 12 and awarded the compensation of Rs.8,40,096.00 along with an amount of Rs.15,000 for loss of consortium and an amount of Rs.5,000 for meeting the expenses for performing religious rites. The Court directed that the amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 12% with effect from 12.3.1996, i.e., the date of filing the proceeding before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. 2. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the present appeal is preferred by the appellants (claimants). Learned counsel for the appellants submits before us only the question of application of the multiplier by the Tribunal. As per the learned counsel, considering the age and the profession of the deceased, selection of the multiplier of 12 by the Claims Tribunal cannot be justified. 3. We have noticed that the deceased was of the age of 35 years when the accident took place and as a result thereof he had lost his life. At the relevant time, he was engaged in the profession of Chartered Accountant and he is certainly expected to live for at least 65 years with the advancement of present medical facilities. The man of 35 years, who is expected live up to the age of 65 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 15 and not 12 as has been held by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. It is not the case of the respondents herein that the deceased was not keeping good health and, therefore, normal expectancy of life would not have been expected by him. It is not the case of the respondents herein that the deceased was not keeping good health and, therefore, normal expectancy of life would not have been expected by him. Considering the overall factors, we are of the view that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal should have selected 15 as the appropriate multiplier in the present case. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is allowed. The compensation is enhanced to Rs.10,50,120.00 (70,008.00 x 15 = Rs.10,50,120.00) (Rupees ten lakh fifty thousand and one hundred twenty). The amount shall carry interest @ 12% with effect from 12.3.1996, the date of filing of the claim petition. 5. In so far as the apportionment of the compensation amount made by the Tribunal is concerned, in view of the enhancement of the compensation as ordered above, we consider it appropriate to modify the enhancement by directing that out of the amount of Rs.2,10,024.00, which is the amount enhanced, an amount of Rs.1,00,000 will be additionally paid to the mother and father of the deceased and the remaining amount of Rs.1,10,024.00 shall be paid to the widow and son of the deceased. This enhanced amount will naturally carry interest @ 12% from the date of filing of the claim petition. Appeal allowed.