INSURANCE CO.LTD. T.P.HUB, 7 RACE COURSE ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) (SHRI SUDHIR v. DANDWATE

AJAY S/O LATE SHRI SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 22 BAJRANG NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) KAPIL S/O LATE SHRI SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) KU. JYOTI D/O LATE SHRI SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) KU. POONAM D/O LATE SHRI SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) AKHIL KADAM S/O MADHUKAR KADAM, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O 6/8, VIDHYANAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) SURESH S/O GENDALAL PANCHAL R/O GRAM SANWER DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) (OWNER OF MARUTI CAR NO.MP-09-HB-9334) (SHRI SAMEER VERMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4) .....RESPONDENTS Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 28-07-2023 18:41:37 2 MISC. APPEAL No. 614 of 2013 BETWEEN:-

4. AJAY S/O LATE SHRI SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) KAPIL S/O LATE SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR, UJJAIN KU. JYOTI D/O LATE SITARAM, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR, UJJAIN KU. POONAM D/O LATE SITARAM , AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 22, BAJRANG NAGAR, UJJAIN (SHRI SAMEER VERMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS) .....APPELLANTS AND

3. AKHIL S/O MADHUKAR KADAM, AGED ABOUT 29 YEAR S, 6/8, VIDHA NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH) (DRIVER OF MARUTI CAR NO.MP-09- HB-9334) SURESH S/O GANDALAL PANCHAL R/O GRAM SANWER, DISTT-INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) (OWNER OF MARUTI CAR NO.MP-09-HB-9334) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIV. OFFICE-4TH FLOOR, PRADHIKARAN BHAWAN, 7 RACECOURSE ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH) (SHRI VINDHYAVASHINI PRASAD KHARE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.3) .....RESPONDENTS T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the following: ORDER Both these appeals are decided together as they arise out of the same award. M.A.No.457/2013 is filed by the Insurance Company seeking reduction Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 28-07-2023 18:41:37 3 of the compensation and M.A.No.614/2013 is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 07.12.2012 passed by the learned 13th Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No.255/2012.

2. Date of accident, negligence and issue of liability is not in dispute, however, the finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal in this regard is not in question. As per the finding of the Tribunal, in case of death of Sitaram, the amount of compensation has been allowed accepting the earning of Rs.12,110/- per month and by adding additional conventional head, total compensation awarded is Rs.12,71,440/-.

3. In M.A.No.614/2013 learned counsel for the appellants contended that the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal accepting earning of Rs.12,110/- per month is wrong and erroneous. He further submitted that the deceased was working as helper in the M.P.Power Transmission Corporation Limited, Nagda and his income is Rs.27,059/- as per the pay slip, therefore, he submitted that correct income of the deceased must be assessed and reasonable amount of compensation may be awarded.

4. In M.A.No.457/2013 learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 13 without taking into account the fact that the salary record which was produced before the Tribunal, the date of birth of the deceased is shown as 20.04.1956, therefore, on the date of accident, he was 56 years of age, then multiplier of 13 is highly exorbitant and incorrect. He further submitted that the Tribunal erred in considering the fact that the daughter of the deceased is getting family pension and there is chances of compassionate appointment, hence, he submits to reduce the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal. Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 28-07-2023 18:41:37 4

5. On perusing the record of the Tribunal, it is found that the claimant has filed pay slip Annexure P-6 of the deceased. According to the pay slip and evidence of claimants' witness D.R.Malviya, it is proved that the deceased was working as a Line Assistant in Madhya Pradesh Transmission Company Limited, Nagda, and his basic pay is Rs.17,100/- D.A.Rs.9996/- therefore the monthly income of the deceased while assessing compensation is Rs.27,096/-. Hence, the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased. In the opinion of this Court for assessing the compensation, income of the deceased must be taken as Rs.27,096/-. In the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 the future prospects is held to be 15% and since the deceased was government servant i.e. Rs.4,064/-. So for assessing income, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.31,160/-.

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has argued that deduction of 1/3rd for personal expenses is on higher side, but in the case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 2009 ACJ 1298, if there is less than three dependent, then 1/3rd of income is deducted for personal expenses. So, submission of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company is not sustainable.

7. After deducting 1/3rd for personal expenses income is Rs.20,773/- X 12 = Rs.2,49,276/- annual income. The date of birth of the deceased according to Ex.P-8C is 20.04.1956. The accident date is 07.03.2012, therefore, on the date of accident the deceased was 56 years of age. According to Sarla Verma (Supra) the age between 56-60 years multiplier of 9 is applicable, hence compensation of loss of dependency is Rs.2,49,276 x 9 = 22,43,484/-. Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 28-07-2023 18:41:37 5 Thereafter, adding filial consortium Rs.1,60,000/-, funeral expenses and loss of estate Rs.30,000/- the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.24,33,484/-. On reduction of compensation already awarded by the Tribunal the amount of enhanced compensation comes to Rs.11,62,044/-.

8. Resultantly, M.A.No.614/2013 is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove and M.A.No.457/2013 is dismissed in the light of the aforesaid discussion. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. The finding with respect to the liability of the Insurance Company shall remain intact.

9. The appellants have valued the appeal only to the extent of Rs.10,00,000/- and paid the court fees. However, for the rest of the amount, the Court fee shall be paid within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter the amount shall be released by the Insurance Company on receiving the certificate. In case the certificate is not filed before the Insurance Company within a period of three months, the claimants shall not be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation. C.C.as per rules. RJ (HIRDESH) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 28-07-2023 18:41:37