Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 453 (MP)

RAMKHA v. PRADEEP KUMAR

2011-04-13

J.K.MAHESHWARI

body2011
JUDGMENT : J.K. Maheshwari, J. This appeal is filed by appellants u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 30.11.2007, passed by learned Additional Member, M.A.C.T., Alirajpur, District Jhabua in Claim Case No. 293 of 2007. By the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 13,57,184 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent, arising out of an accident which occurred on 29.5.2006, causing death of Bherusingh. Appellants had filed the claim petition under sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 35,00,000. It is stated that the deceased Bherusingh was an assistant teacher who died in a road accident arising out of a motor vehicle on 29.5.2006. 2. The Tribunal has awarded the total sum of Rs. 13,57,184, out of which for loss of dependency Rs. 13,25,184, accepting the earning of the deceased as Rs. 10,353 per month, applying the multiplier of 16 and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses. Under the conventional heads, Rs. 2,000 for funeral expenses, Rs. 5,000 for loss of consortium and Rs. 25,000 for loss to estate have been awarded. 3. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, negligence in driving the offending vehicle and the issue of liability as to who is liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal has already recorded the findings on these issues in favour of the appellants. None of those findings have been assailed at the instance of the respondents, i.e., owner/driver/insurance company by filing cross-appeal or cross-objection. Thus it is not necessary to burden the judgment by detailing the facts on the said issues. 4. Mr. Patwa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, contends that the loss of dependency as calculated is on lower side as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , and looking to the number of dependants, at least 1/5th may be deducted towards personal expenses and accordingly the loss of dependency ought to have been calculated. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , and looking to the number of dependants, at least 1/5th may be deducted towards personal expenses and accordingly the loss of dependency ought to have been calculated. It is also contended that for future prospects, no amount has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal though the deceased was an assistant teacher and if he had survived, he would have served up to the age of 62 years, therefore as per the judgment of Sarla Verma (supra), looking to the age of the deceased at least 30 per cent could be allowed under the head of personal expenses although he may fall below the age of 40 years. In view of the foregoing, prayer is made to enhance the compensation reasonably. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Pradeep Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 insurance company, contends that in the present case out of 10 dependants, the mother and father are alive. The deceased was having seven children and being a government servant it is not permissible. In that view of the matter, deduction of 1/5th towards personal expenses may not be allowed and towards future prospects also no amount may be awarded as the wife of the deceased may get family pension on account of his death. In that view of the matter, it is submitted by him that the compensation as awarded by the impugned award is just and proper, which does not warrant any interference by this court. 6. After having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties on the point of determination of loss of dependency and deduction of 1/5th for personal expenses, the argument as advanced by Mr. Patwa seems to be justifiable. The earning as accepted by the Tribunal, Rs. 10,353, is not being disputed, however, the annual earnings come to Rs. 1,24,236. If we deduct 1/5th then loss of dependency comes to Rs. 99,389 per annum and if the multiplier of 16, as the deceased was of 391/2 years, is made applicable then it comes to Rs. 15,90,224. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 32,000 under conventional heads, however if we add the same then it comes to Rs. 16.22,224. 1,24,236. If we deduct 1/5th then loss of dependency comes to Rs. 99,389 per annum and if the multiplier of 16, as the deceased was of 391/2 years, is made applicable then it comes to Rs. 15,90,224. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 32,000 under conventional heads, however if we add the same then it comes to Rs. 16.22,224. On coming to the point of loss of future prospects, it is seen from the record that the deceased was getting salary from the government job, however in the facts and circumstances of the case, some amount under the head of future prospects may be awarded. In the present case, the number of dependants were more, therefore, 1/5th has already been deducted by this court while calculating the loss of dependency. In any case, because he was having a government job, therefore, in the opinion of this court, some lump sum amount may be awarded to him which this court quantifies as Rs. 2,00,000. In view of the aforesaid, total compensation comes to Rs. 18,22,224. If we deduct Rs. 13,57,184, the compensation as already awarded by the Tribunal, then the enhanced amount comes to Rs. 4,65,040. 7. On perusal of the award passed by the Claims Tribunal, it seems that interest has not been awarded from the date of filing of the claim petition and it is merely an observation that if the amount of compensation is not paid within one month then interest shall be leviable at the rate of 6 per cent. Such finding is improper because in routine course the compensation ought to have been awarded from the date of filing of the application, however on the amount awarded by the Tribunal, interest from the date of filing of the application at the rate of 6 per cent is awarded and the enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. After calculating the aforesaid interest, the amount be paid to the appellants. 8. Looking to the fact that there are five daughters, however, in the opinion of this court, entire amount is not liable to be given to the wife of the deceased. In the opinion of this court, 10 per cent amount may be given to the mother in cash. 8. Looking to the fact that there are five daughters, however, in the opinion of this court, entire amount is not liable to be given to the wife of the deceased. In the opinion of this court, 10 per cent amount may be given to the mother in cash. It appears that there are five minor unmarried daughters of the deceased, however Rs. 1,25,000 in fixed deposit in the name of all the unmarried minor daughters shall be kept and that amount be disbursed at the time of their marriage. There are two sons. In the name of major son, an amount of Rs. 50,000 shall be kept in the fixed deposit and that amount be disbursed at the time of his marriage. So far as minor son is concerned, an amount of Rs. 1,00,000 be deposited in the fixed deposit and that amount be utilized for his future prospects and also at the time of his marriage. The remaining amount be disbursed to the wife, out of which 75 per cent may be kept in fixed deposits and 25 per cent for the routine needs. The aforesaid directions would be applicable only if the amount has not already been disbursed by the Claims Tribunal. In case the amount has already been disbursed by Claims Tribunal, then the aforesaid directions would be applicable on the enhanced amount and the amount of interest so calculated. With the aforesaid directions, this appeal stands allowed in part. In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.