Smt. Anitha v. Sri. J.Lakshmipathy

1. Sri. J.Lakshmipathy, S/o. Sri. Narasaraju, Major, No.74/668, Ayappa Nagara, Vijayawada, Krishna Dist. (A.P). 2 R.C. Owner of lorry No.A.P.16 X-4437.

2. National Insurance Co., Ltd., Reg. Off. At Shubram Complex, M.G.Road, Bangalore-1. Rep. by its Manager. ….Respondents (By Sri. M.U.Poonacha, Advocate for R2; Notice to R1 dispensed with v/o. dated 07/08/2009) ******** This MFA is filed U/s. 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 25/01/2007 passed in MVC No. 3777/2006 on the file of the V Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20), partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation. This M.F.A. coming on N.K. PATIL J, delivered the following: for Hearing this day, :J U D G M E N T: This appeal by the appellants-claimants directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 25/01/2007 passed in MVC No. 3777/2006 by the V Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20), (‘Tribunal’ for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate. 3

2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of `8,37,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its payment, as against the claim of the claimants for a sum of `20`20`20`20/- lakhs, on account of the death the deceased Sri. Shiva Kumar, in the road traffic accident.

3. In brief, the facts of the case are: The appellant Nos.1 and 2 are the wife and minor son of the deceased Sri.Shiva Kumar. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 13.5.2006 at about 6.30 a.m. on Tirupathi- Kalahasthi road near Nehru Hotel of Yerapedu, Chittor District, while the deceased along with his wife and son were travelling in a car bearing No.KA.14.M.2006, at time, the driver lorry bearing No.AP.16.X.4437 came in a rash and negligent manner 4 and dashed to their car, due to which, deceased died and his wife and son have sustained injuries.

4. It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 42 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Storekeeper in Central Institute of Coastal Engineering for Fishery and drawing the salary of `9,500/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family. Due to his untimely death, appellant No.1 has lost her husband and appellant No.2 has lost the guidance and security of his father.

5. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of `8,37,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its payment.

6. Being dis- satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation. 5

7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for second respondent-Insurance Company.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset submitted that, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at `9,200/- per month contrary to the salary drawn by him as per Ex.P73-salary certificate which shows that, deceased was drawing the salary of `9,466/- per month. Further, learned counsel for appellants placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2892 submitted that, 30% is to be added towards future prospects while determining loss of dependency. Therefore, he submitted that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified. 6

9. Per contra, learned counsel Insurer submitted that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

10. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellants and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, we are of the considered view that, the occurrence of the accident and resultant death of the deceased is not in dispute. Further, it emerges that, Tribunal is justified in assessing the income of the deceased at `9,200/- per month and we accept the same. To that, 30% is to be added towards future prospects in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2892 as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for appellants. If 30% `2,760/-) 7 is added to the monthly income of the deceased towards future prospects, his total monthly income comes to `11,960/- (`9,200/- + `2,760/-). Out of which, if 1/3rd (`3,986/-) is deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased his net income comes to `7,974/- per month. Accepting the Multiplier of ‘14’ adopted by the Tribunal, we re-determine the loss of dependency at `13,39,632/- (`7,974/- x 12 x 14) instead of `7,72,800/- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.

11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum of `45,000/- towards conventional heads, such as, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, loss of estate and transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of `13,84,632/- instead of `8,37,000/-. There would be an enhancement of `5,47,632/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. 8

12. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part and the impugned judgment and award dated 25/01/2007 passed in MVC No. 3777/2006 by the V Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20), hereby modified, awarding the compensation of `5,47,632/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition its realisation, in addition to compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of `5,47,632/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award. Immediately on deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of `5,47,632/-, a sum of `2,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalised or 9 Scheduled Bank, in the name appellant No. 1 for a period of ten years and renewable by another ten years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. A sum of `2,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name appellant No.2 till he attains 25 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No.1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, for the welfare of appellant No.2 periodically. The remaining `47,632/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant No.1 immediately. Office is directed to draw the award, accordingly. JUDGE SD/- tsn* SD/- JUDGE