Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2621 (ALL)

Rampati and Others v. Zahid Ali and Another

2013-10-22

RAJIV SHARMA, SATISH CHANDRA

body2013
Rajiv Sharma & Satish Chandra,JJ. Present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred for the enhancement of the compensation, against the judgment and award dated 08.01.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No.185 of 2003 (Rampati and others vs. Zahid Ali) whereby the total compensation of Rs.2,95,000/- was awarded. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 12.01.1999 at about 8.30 am, the deceased Ram Autar along with his family members - wife, son, daughter, mother and father, were travelling in a Jeep bearing No.UP 32-T 5675 from Lucknow to Sindhauli. When the Jeep has tried to overtake a DCM Truck, then it colluded with a Truck, which was coming from the opposite direction. Three persons including the deceased died on the spot. The deceased was aged about 27 years old and he was a Rickshaw Puller. The appellants-claimant have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, who after examining the entire evidence has awarded a compensation of Rs.2,95,000/- along with 8% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. Not being satisfied, the claimants-appellant have filed the present appeal for the enhancement of the compensation. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record. 4. In the instant case, the accident is not in dispute. The only dispute is pertaining to the quantum of compensation. In the absence of any document, the Tribunal took the notional income of Rs.80/- per day, which comes to Rs.2400/- per month and Rs.28,800/- per annum. Out of it 1/3rd i.e. Rs.9600/- was deducted for the purpose of computation of the award. The benefit of the Judgment passed in the case of Laxmi Devi and others vs. Mohammad Tabbar and another, (2008) 2 TAC 394 SC, cannot be given in the instant case, as the accident is prior to this judgment. 5. It appears that the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd amount of the total income but fact remains that in the instant case, the claimant are six. So, as per the the U.P. Motor Vehicles 11th Amendment Rules, 2011 where the family members are four to six, deduction will have to be made 1/4th. Thus, the deduction will have to be made 1/4th of the total income. Hence, it will come to Rs.21,600/- per annum. 6. So, as per the the U.P. Motor Vehicles 11th Amendment Rules, 2011 where the family members are four to six, deduction will have to be made 1/4th. Thus, the deduction will have to be made 1/4th of the total income. Hence, it will come to Rs.21,600/- per annum. 6. By looking the age of 27 years, the multiplier of 18 has to be applied. So, by applying the multiplier of 18, compensation comes to Rs.21,600x18 =Rs.3,88,800/-. In addition, the claimant is also entitled for Rs.9500/- for the loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses etc. Thus, total compensation comes to Rs.3,88,800+9,500= Rs.3,98,300/- and the same will have to be paid along with interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition before the Tribunal. Since the deceased was a Rickshaw Puller, hence no future prospects can be taken into consideration. 7. In view of above, we modify the impugned judgment and award dated 08.01.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No.185 of 2003 to the effect that the appellant-claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.3,98,300/- along with interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition before the Tribunal. 8. Accordingly, the Insurance Company (Opposite party no.2) is directed to deposit the amount/remaining amount along with interest before the concerned Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The amount already deposited be adjusted. The registry of this Court is also directed to send the lower court record/money, if any, within a period of one month to the concerned Tribunal, who is further directed to disburse the same, in terms of the award within a period of three months thereafter. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the claimants-appellant is partly allowed. _______________