Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 285 (CHH)

Vasudev v. Laxman Bhai

2010-12-08

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, RAJEEV GUPTA

body2010
ORDER Rajeev Gupta, C.J. 1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 28.02.2002, passed in Claim Case No. 24/1999. 2. As against the compensation of Rs. 4,60,000/- claimed by the Appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow, minor daughters and parents of deceased Shankar Lal, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 20.03.1998, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Shankar Lal died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 20.03.1998; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. G.J.-7X-8606; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4. As the Respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5. The Tribunal considering the age of deceased Shankar Lal, his parents, widow and minor daughter awarded a lump-sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Shankar Lal. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6. Shri Pawan Kesharwani, learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the compensation in the prescribed manner of first assessing the income of the deceased and claimants' dependency and then multiplying the same with the appropriate multiplier; and in awarding lump-sum compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- only. 7. Shri Sudhir Agrawal. 6. Shri Pawan Kesharwani, learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the compensation in the prescribed manner of first assessing the income of the deceased and claimants' dependency and then multiplying the same with the appropriate multiplier; and in awarding lump-sum compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- only. 7. Shri Sudhir Agrawal. learned Counsel for responded No. 3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that as the claimants could not establish any definite and regular income of deceased Shankar Lal, the compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9. Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. The Tribunal apparently has fallen into error in not assessing the compensation in the prescribed manner of first assessing the income of the deceased and then claimants' dependency and thereafter multiplying the same with the appropriate multiplier; and in awarding lump-sum compensation to the claimants. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation in the prescribed manner afresh. 11. Though the claimants pleaded that deceased Shankar Lal used to earn Rs. 4,00,000/- per annum from agriculture, the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. No reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the extent of the agricultural land in the name of the deceased. In this state of evidence, we assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 18,000/- per annum as the deceased being 26 years of age could have earned Rs. 50-55/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to assess the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 18,000/- per annum. 12. By deducting the usual l/3rd of Rs. 18,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs. 12,000/-per annum. 13. 50-55/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to assess the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 18,000/- per annum. 12. By deducting the usual l/3rd of Rs. 18,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs. 12,000/-per annum. 13. Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and minor daughters and the parents of the deceased, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case. 14. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 12,000/-, with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs. 1,80,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs. 10,000/- towards funeral expenses; loss of estate; and loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 1,90.000/- as compensation for the death of Shankar Lal in the motor accident. 15. 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. 16. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 90,000/- at Rs. 11,000/-. 17. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the Appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,90,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 11,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 90,000/- 18. Respondent No. 3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 1,01,000/- (Rs. 90,000/-towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs. 11,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 90,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 19. No order as to costs.