1. In connection with the vehicular accident that occurred on 22.01.2005 involving the vehicle (Car) bearing registration No. GJ-23-2436 in which Vaibhavkumar Dineshbhai Patel died, the legal heirs of the deceased filed Misc. M.A.C.P. No.131/2005 u/s. 163-A of the M.V. Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kheda at Nadiad. The said claim petition came to be disposed of by judgment and award dated 15.07.2006 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and the respondents, original claimants, were awarded total compensation of Rs.4,53,300/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs. Against the said award, the present appeal has been preferred.
2. It has been contended on behalf of appellant-Insurance Company that the claim petition was filed u/s.163-A of the M.V. Act and therefore, the Second Schedule appended to the said proviso ought to have followed by the Tribunal while computing compensation rather than applying an independent multiplier. Reliance has been placed on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Gurumallamma and another, (2009) 16 S.C.C. 43.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents was not in a position to dispute the proposition of law laid down in the above decision.
4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the facts of the case and the principle laid down in Gurumallamma's case (supra), the formula stipulated in the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Act is required to be followed for computing compensation. In other words, in a proceeding u/s. 163-A of the Act, the amount of compensation is to be determined as per the method specified in the Second Schedule. Thus, by following the method specified in the Second Schedule and considering the age of the parent at 52 years, the annual income could be considered at the maximum amount of Rs.40,000/-. Hence, the total income would come to Rs.4.00 Lacs, out of which 1/3rd is required to be deducted towards personal expenses. Therefore, the balance amount would come to Rs.2,66,667/-, which is rounded off to Rs.2,66,700/-. Hence, the claimants shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,71,200/- [2,66,700 + 4,500] as against Rs.4,53,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. The excess amount of Rs.1,82,100/- is required to be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the respondents, original claimants, shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,71,200/- only, along with interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal. The excess amount of Rs.1,82,100/- shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/* Top