Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 569 (MP)

Sukhdevi v. Bharat Bhushan

2016-07-16

J.K.MAHESHWARI

body2016
ORDER 1. Assailing the award dated 20.5.2010 passed by the IV Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhind in Claim Case No.18/2009 on the point of inadequacy of the compensation, the appellants have preferred this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2. The appellants had filed the claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.6,32,000/- on account of death of deceased Vidyaram in an accident that took place on 6.12.2007. It was pleaded by the claimants i.e. widow, son and his wife that the deceased was having his earning from agriculture and animal husbandary, however the compensation as prayed in the claim petition may be awarded. 3. The reply to the claim petition was filed and after recording the evidence, the Tribunal has awarded the total sum of Rs.2,24,200/-, out of which in loss of dependency Rs.2,16,000/-accepting the earning of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month, applying the multiplier of 9 and after deducting 1/3 towards personal expenses. The Tribunal has also awarded some amount in conventional heads i.e. funeral Rs.2,000/-, in consortium Rs.5,000/-, Rs.1,000/- as transportation charges to hospital, Rs.200/- towards loss of estate by the impugned award. 4. As the incident occurred, negligence of driver of driving the offending vehicle, the issue of liability jointly and severally to pay compensation have been decided recording the findings in favour of the appellants by the Tribunal and none of those findings have been assailed at the instance of the respondents i.e. owner, driver or insurance company by filing the cross-appeal or the cross-objection, however it is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail to burden the judgment on the said issues. It is only the inadequacy of the compensation which has been assailed, however the arguments in detail have been considered in succeeding paragraphs. 5. Shri Gupta, learned counsel representing the appellants contends that due to the said accident Vidyaram has died, who was the sole bread earner of the family. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate, because the earning has not been duly assessed and the multiplier has also not been properly applied for, while determining the loss of dependency. In conventional heads i.e. funeral, consortium, love and affection, loss of estate the amount as awarded is on lower side and deserves enhancement. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate, because the earning has not been duly assessed and the multiplier has also not been properly applied for, while determining the loss of dependency. In conventional heads i.e. funeral, consortium, love and affection, loss of estate the amount as awarded is on lower side and deserves enhancement. In view of the foregoing submissions, the enhancement of the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal has been prayed for. 6. On the other hand Shri Agrawal, learned counsel representing the respondent /Insurance Company contends in support of the findings of the Claims Tribunal and submitted that the compensation as awarded by the impugned award appears to be just and reasonable, however, interference by this Court for enhancement of the compensation is not warranted. 7. After having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the pleadings and the evidence so adduced, it appears that the determination of the earning has not duly been done. In conventional heads i.e. funeral, consortium, love and affection, loss of estate, the amount awarded is on lower side. Thus after hearing and on due deliberations and also on consideration of the totality of the facts and circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, the amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal is liable to be enhanced by Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees One lac and twenty thousand only) in lump sum thereby making the total compensation to Rs.3,44,200/-. 8. In view of the forgoing discussions, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed in part. Appellants No.1 and 2 are held entitled to receive the enhanced amount of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees one lac and twenty thousand only) in addition to the amount of compensation already awarded by the Claims Tribunal making the total compensation to Rs.3,44,200/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. The said amount be paid within a period of three months from the date of the award otherwise the interest @ 12% shall be leviable. In the facts of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs. R. P. Gupta for appellants; B. K. Agrawal for respondent No.3/Insurance Company.