Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 131 (CHH)

RAMWATI BAI v. SHIVCHARAN

2009-04-09

RAJEEV GUPTA, SUNIL KUMAR SINHA

body2009
ORDER As per Hon'ble Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J.:- 1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the l0th Additional Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (FTC) Bi1aspur, Chhattisgarh (henceforth, '''the Tribunal") vide award dated 17.08.2004 passed in claim case No.21/2004. 2. The claimants, the two unfortunate widows, minor children and mother of deceased - Ramkumar Kenvat claimed compensation ofRs.27,50,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth, ''the Act") for his death in the motor accident on 26.11.2001 when his motorcycle was dashed by the offending vehicle - truck bearing registration No.MIR/9191 resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot itself The claimants further pleaded that the deceased - Ramkumar Kenvat was aged about 36 years and used to earn RsA,500/- to Rs.5,000/- per month from his General Store and Rs.70,000/- per annum from agriculture. 3. The owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the claim and was proceeded ex-parte before the Tribunal. 4. The driver and insurer of the offending vehicle - truck contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The driver pleaded that his vehicle was not involved in any accident, whereas the insurer took the plea that the driver of the offending vehicle - truck was not holding a valid driving license and the truck was being plied in breach of the policy conditions. 5. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led before it held that deceased - Ramkumar Kenvat died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 26.11.2001; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle - truck; as the offending vehicle truck on the date of the accident was insured with Oriental insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 6. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act. By deducting l/3rd ofRs. I 5,000/towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.1 0,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By deducting l/3rd ofRs. I 5,000/towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.1 0,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.32,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.l ,92,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased - Ramkumar Kenvat in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of Rs.l ,92,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 7. Shri Sudeep Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation ofRs.1 ,92,000/- only. 8. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.3 - Oriental Insurance Company on the other hand supported the award and submitted that as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the compensation of Rs.l ,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9. The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Ramkumar Kenvat died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 26.11.2001; the driver of the offending vehicle - truck was responsible for the accident; and the insurer of the offending vehicle was liable to pay compensation to the claimants have now attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award. That apart, these findings are not under challenge before us in this appeal. We, therefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribunal. 10. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Ramkumar Kenvat used to earn RsA,500/- to Rs.5,000/- per month from his General Store and Rs.70,000/per annum from agriculture, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 11. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 11. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is certainly on the lower side and requires re-consideration. 12. The notional income ofRs.l5,000/- was prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act in the year 1994. The accident in the present case wherein deceased Ramkumar Kenvat lost his life took place in the year 200 1. If the increase in the prices of the essential commodities and the cost of living between the years 1994 and 200 I is taken into consideration, the notional income of Rs. I 5,000/- prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs10,000/- in the year2001. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.30,000/per annum. 13. By deducting 1/3rd ofRs.30,0001- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.20,000/- per annum. 14. Considering that deceased Ramkumar Kenvat was aged about 36 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 13 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kalpana (Smt.) and others . 15. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.20,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,60,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. Thus, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum ofRs.2, 75,0001- as compensation for the death of deceased Ramkumar Kenvat in the motor accident. 16. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17. 16. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17. Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in the disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the insurance company alone is not to be blamed for the delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.83,0001- at Rs.17,0001-. 18. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1 ,92,000/- awarded by the Tri bunal is enhanced to Rs.2,75,000/-, with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.17,0001- on the enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.83,0001-. 19. Respondent No.3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.l ,00,000/- (Rs.83,0001towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 17,0001- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.83,0001-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20. No order as to costs. Appeal Partly Allowed.