Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1406 (RAJ)

Nalini Wd/o Shri Narendra v. Sajad Khan S/o Liyaqat Khan Pathan

2016-09-27

ARUN BHANSALI

body2016
JUDGMENT : Arun Bhansali, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 05.08.1999 passeby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udaipur ('the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,52,000/- as compensation to the appellants alongwith interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. the date of application i.e. 11.05.1990. 2. The application for compensation was filed by wife/children/mother of one Narendra, inter-alia, with the averments that the deceased was travelling in a Video Coach (Bus) No. R.R.E. 99 from Ahmedabad to Nathdwara on 08.02.1990, when a Truck No. URW-35, which was being driven rashly and negligently by Sajad, collided with the said Bus, resulting in injuries to Narendra, to which, he succumbed. It was claimed that the deceased was a partner in partnership firm and was earning Rs. 36,000/- annually, aged 43 years and based on the said submissions, compensation was sought. 3. The application was resisted by the non-claimants. 4. The issues were framed and evidence was recorded by the Tribunal. By the impugned award, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the age of the deceased was 43 years, assessed his annual income was Rs. 36,000/- based on the Certificate (Exhibit-5) and deducting Rs. 1,000/- towards personal expenses and applying multiplier of 10, a compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,40,000/- towards loss of income, Rs. 10,000/- towards mental pain and Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses was awarded. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the Tribunal committed error in awarded a meagre compensation to the claimants, which is contrary to the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 . It was submitted that a low multiplier has been applied and the higher deduction has been taken by the Tribunal. Further, the amount towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection to the claimants have not been awarded and, therefore, the award impugned deserves to be enhanced. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent supported the award impugned. It was submitted that the Tribunal has awarded just compensation and the same does not call for any interference. 7. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 8. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent supported the award impugned. It was submitted that the Tribunal has awarded just compensation and the same does not call for any interference. 7. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 8. The age of the deceased was assessed by the Tribunal based on the claim of the claimants at 43 years. Once the age of the deceased was 43, in terms of judgment in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), a multiplier of 14 should have been applied; further, the deduction in view of the said judgment, as there were four dependents on the deceased should have been ¼th only. The Tribunal has awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs. 10,000/- only towards mental shock, which is too low, to which, wife of the deceased is entitled to compensation of Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of consortium, while the two children and the mother of the deceased are entitled to Rs. 10,000/- each for loss for love and affection. 9. The award of compensation towards funeral expenses does not call for any interference. 10. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 2,250 X 12 X 14 = Rs. 3,78,000 + 20,000 + 30,000 + 2,000 = Rs. 4,30,000/-. 11. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is partly allowed. The compensation awarded to the claimants is enhanced from Rs. 2,52,000/- to Rs. 4,30,000/-. On the enhanced amount of compensation, the claimants would be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application i.e. 11.05.1990 to the date of actual payment. 12. Out of the enhanced amount of compensation alongwith interest, 70% of the compensation shall be paid to appellant No. 1 - Smt. Nalini and rest of the amount of compensation will be equally distributed among the children and mother of the deceased. The amount be paid in the Saving Bank Account of the claimants. 13. The respondent No. 7 - the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. the Insurer of the Bus, who has been held responsible for the payment of compensation by the Tribunal, is directed to make payment of the compensation within a period of six weeks from the date of this judgment. Appeal partly allowed.