Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1024 (BOM)

Dnyaneshwar v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

2017-06-08

SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI

body2017
JUDGMENT : Shalini Phansalkarjoshi, J. This appeal takes an exception to the judgment and award dated 07.04.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.70/2004. By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has granted the amount of Rs. 69,300/as compensation to the respondent Nos.1 and 3 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 2. The only issue raised for consideration in this appeal is relating to the quantum of compensation. As regards the factum of the deceased sustaining injuries in the vehicular accident and the liability of the respondent No.1 the insurance company and respondent No.2 the owner of the offending tanker, it is not at all disputed, in view of the fact that they have not filed any appeal challenging the award. The appeal is filed by the original claimants contending inter alia that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is quite meager, which is only to the tune of Rs. 69,300/-. 3. On the perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal and having regard to the legal position as enunciated in the decisions of (i) Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) and (ii) Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 (SC) in the considered opinion of this Court, also the compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal is not only inadequate, but also too meager. It is accepted by the Tribunal that the deceased was running the age of 27 years and was getting a income of Rs. 1800/- per month. As the deceased was unmarried, as per the settled position of law it has to be held that he was spending 50% amount of his income towards personal expenses and contributing 50% towards the dependency of the appellant Nos.1 and 2. Appellant No.1 is the father and appellant No.2, at the time of incident, was an unmarried sister of the deceased. The Tribunal has however deducted 2/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased, which cannot be upheld. 4. Similarly, the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 9. However, if one considers the age of the dependents namely the appellant No.1 who was of 53 years and the sister of the deceased that of 19 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 11. 5. 4. Similarly, the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 9. However, if one considers the age of the dependents namely the appellant No.1 who was of 53 years and the sister of the deceased that of 19 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 11. 5. The Tribunal has also not considered the future prospects of the deceased, which as per the judgment of Sarla Verma has to be considered as 50% of the income, which the deceased was drawing at the time of accident. 6. It is then pertinent to note that the Tribunal has awarded merely the amount of Rs. 2000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/- towards loss of love, affection and estate. The said amount also needs to be enhanced in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and Rajesh and others. 7. If all these factors are taken into consideration, then the amount of compensation to which the appellants are entitled comes to Rs. 1800/per month towards the income + Rs. 900/- towards the future prospect = 2700 x 12 = 32,400/- divided by spent towards the personal expenses of the deceased comes to Rs. 16,200/- multiplied by 11' comes to Rs. 1,78,200/- + Rs. 25,000/- towards the funeral expenses and Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the loss of estate, love and affection. Thus the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 3,03,200/-. 8. As a result, the appeal is allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs. 61,300/- inclusive of no fault liability to Rs. 3,03,200/- (inclusive of no fault liability) with interest as awarded by the Tribunal, at the rate of 7.5% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of this order. 9. The appeal is allowed and is disposed of accordingly in the above terms.