Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 772 (AP)

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sri Krishna

2012-08-27

K.G.SHANKAR

body2012
Judgment : The insurer, who is the third respondent in M.V.O.P.No.209 of 2006 on the file of the Chairman, Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), impugns the Award dated 08.10.2010 whereunder the learned Chairman awarded compensation at Rs.5,18,000/-together with interest at 7.5% p.a., in favour of the claimants. 2. The deceased initially laid the claim seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him. He later died. His wife and six children have come on record as petitioners 2 to 8 in M.V.O.P.No.209 of 2006. 3. The deceased by name Krishna was working as a labourer in a construction company owned by the second respondent. In an accident caused by lorry bearing registration No. AP 10 U 4169 owned by the second respondent, the deceased sustained grievous injuries. The accident occurred on 30.01.2003. The deceased underwent treatment at various places. Subsequently, he breathed his lost on 15.04.2004. Consequently, the case became one filed for the death of the first claimant. 4. The insurer questions the quantum of compensation but not the mode and manner of the accident. 5. The evidence of P.W.2 clearly established that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal was perfectly justified in concluding that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. I accordingly hold that the claimants have established that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 6. The Tribunal determined income of the deceased notionally at Rs.3,000/-per month. Where the petitioner was a labourer in construction work and where the accident occurred on 30.01.2003, I consider that the Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased properly. I have no hesitation to accept the view of the Tribunal that the income of the deceased was Rs.3,000/-per month. The annual income of the deceased consequently is Rs.36,000/-. 7. As there are as many as seven dependants upon the deceased, in view of Sarala Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009 A.C.J 1298), I consider that 1/5th of the income of the deceased alone deserves to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses. If 1/5th of the notional annual income of Rs.36,000/-is deducted(1/5th being Rs.7,200/-), the annual notional income for the purpose of the calculation would be Rs.28,800/-. If 1/5th of the notional annual income of Rs.36,000/-is deducted(1/5th being Rs.7,200/-), the annual notional income for the purpose of the calculation would be Rs.28,800/-. The deceased was said to be 45 years old at the time of the accident. I agree that multiplier 13 is the appropriate multiplier, where the deceased was 45 years old. If the annual notional income of Rs.28,800/-is multiplied by 13, the amount would be Rs.3,74,400/-. The petitioner shall be entitled to Rs.3,74,400/-towards loss of income and future expectancy of life. The second claimant, who is the wife of the deceased, was said to be 43 years old at the time of the accident. I consider it appropriate to award Rs.6,000/-towards loss of consortium in favour of the first petitioner. The petitioners are also entitled to loss of estate at Rs.10,000/-. Rs.2,000/-deserves to be awarded towards funeral expenses. As the deceased underwent medical treatment and where the claimants produced medical bills to a tune of Rs.30,000/-, the Tribunal was correct in granting Rs.30,000/-as compensation towards medical expenses. However the Tribunal granted compensation at Rs.20,000/-towards the injury. The compensation towards pain and sufferance for the injury would arise only when the claimant is alive. Such compensation towards pain and sufferance cannot accrue to the dependants of the deceased. Consequently, the award of compensation at Rs.20,000/-by the Tribunal towards injury, cannot be accepted and is accordingly rejected. 8. The claimants consequently are entitled to compensation at Rs. Compensation towards loss of income and a) future expectancy of life 3,74,400-00 b) Compensation towards loss of consortium in favour of the first petitioner 6,000-00 c) Compensation towards loss of estate 10,000-00 d) Compensation towards funeral expenses 2,000-00 e) Compensation towards medical expenses 30,000-00 Total 4,22,400-00 The claimants accordingly are entitled to compensation at Rs.4,22,400/-. The claimants indeed are entitled to interest at 7.5% per annum in view of New India Assurance Co.Ltd., v. Gopali (Civil Appeal No.5179 of 2012, Dt.05.07.2012 before the Supreme Court). 9. Accordingly, the claimants are granted compensation at Rs.4,22,400/-together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation and costs before the trial Court. This appeal is disposed of without costs. 10. Out of the awarded amount, the children of the deceased i.e., respondents 3 to 8 herein are entitled to compensation at Rs.50,000/-each. This appeal is disposed of without costs. 10. Out of the awarded amount, the children of the deceased i.e., respondents 3 to 8 herein are entitled to compensation at Rs.50,000/-each. The second respondent, who is the wife of the deceased, shall be entitled to compensation at Rs.1,22,400/-together with costs. Each of the claimants is entitled to respective shares of interest. The wife shall be entitled to withdraw Rs.50,000/-at the first instance. The balance shall lie in fixed deposit for a period of three years at the end of which, the wife shall be entitled to withdraw another instalment of Rs.50,000/-. The balance shall again be invested for a further period of three years, at the end of which, the wife shall be entitled to withdraw the balance together with accrued interest and costs. The minor children are entitled to withdraw their respective share of awarded amount, after each of them attains majority. During the minority of the children, the wife shall be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on the share of the minors once in an year.