Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 122 of 1996 Appellant :- Atar Singh And Others Respondent :- Shri Subhash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Appellant :- Madhav Jain Counsel for Respondent :- A.K. Shukla
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Madhav Jain, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri A.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent. None appeared for the owner.
2. By way of this appeal, appellants who are the heirs of deceased have challenged the judgment and order dated 29.9.1995 passed by VII Additional District Judge/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Agra (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 318 of 1993 awarding a sum of Rs.61,600/- with interest at the rate of 12%.
3. Facts are not necessary as the accident is accepted. The policy was in vogue has been accepted. The deceased died out of the accident involving the vehicle insured by the respondent is not in dispute. The Issue of negligence has also not been agitated here. However, the skeletal facts regarding compensation is being discussed in the body of the judgment.
4. It is submitted that there are four heirs namely the husband and the three sons of the deceased. The deceased was 40 years of age at the time of accident and she was in the dairy business. It was claimed in the appeal that the income of the deceased would be Rs.2,000/- per month which has been disputed by Sri Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent.
5. This Court feels that her income can be considered as Rs.18,000/- per year as she was a self employed lady as per the decision in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 0 Supreme (SC) 1050 and 30% will have to be added to the datum figure which is rounded up to Rs.24,000/- out of which 1/4th will have to be deducted as the expences incurred by the deceased. Hence, Rs.18,000/- would be the amount available to the family members. The multiplier would be 15 as per the judgment in Pranay Sethi (Supra) and, therefore, the amount would be Rs.18,000 x 15 = 2,70,000/-. It is not shown by the counsel for the respondent that this calculation is bad as it is in consonance with the decisions in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Pranay Sethi (Supra).
6. The amount of non-pecuniary damages will have to be added and as the matter is of pre 1995, Rs.30,000/- would be proper.
7. As far as issue of interest is concerned, I am in complete agreement with submission made by Sri Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent that the interest should be at 9% per anum in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No.-1011 of 2012 (Ramesh Kumar Soni Vs. Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd. Thr.Manager & Another) decided on 3.3.2017, wherin the Court has held as under:
"14. Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of claim petition. It is contended that interest at the rate of 6 % is on much lower side and it should be 9 %.
15. We find in recent authorities, Courts have held that appropriate rate of interest should be 9%.
16. In Neeta Vs The Divisional Manager, MSRTC (2015) 3 SCC 590 where accident took place on 22.03.2011, Court allowed 9% rate of interest and held that interest awarded by Tribunal at 8% was erroneous. Para-11 of the judgment reads as under:-
"The appellants are also entitled to the interest on the compensation awarded by this Court in these appeals at the rate of 9% per annum along with the amount under the different heads as indicated above. The Courts below have erred in awarding the interest at the rate of 8 % per annum on the compensation awarded by them to the Appellants without following the decision of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi Vs. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association and Ors. MANU/SC/1255/2011: (2011) 14SCC 481. Accordingly, we award the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the compensation determined in these appeals from the date of filing of the application till the date of payment."
17. In Kanhsingh Vs. Tukaram, 2015 (1) SCALE 366 where accident had taken place on 02.07.2006 but tribunal awarded no interest. Court held that this is erroneous and 9 % interest should have been allowed in view of the principles laid down in Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (2011) 14 SCC 481.
18. In Kalpanaraj and Others Vs Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (2015) 2 SCC where accident took place on or before 1994, High Court had awarded interest at the rate of 9 % per annum which was challenged that it is on higher side. Court upheld said rate of interest.
19. In Shashikala and Others Vs Gangalakshmamma and Another (2015) 9 SCC 150, where accident had taken place on 14.12.2006, Court allowed 9 % rate of interest from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.
20. In Asha Verman and Ors Vs Maharaj Singh & Ors, 2015 (4) SCALE 329, High Court awarded interest at the rate of 8 % . Accident took place on 27.11.2016. It was held that 8 % interest is on lower side and it should be 9 %.
21. In Surit Gupta Vs United India Insurance Company (2015) 11 SCC 457, accident took place in July, 1990. Punjab and Haryana High Court had awarded interest at the rate of 6 %. Court held that it is on lower side and it should be 9 %.
22. In Chanderi Devi and another Vs Jaspal Singh and others (2015) 11 SCC 703, date of accident is September 2006 and the incumbent died on 04.10.2006. Court awarded 9 % interest.
23. In Jitendra Khimshankar Trivedi Vs Kasam Daud Kumbhar and Others (2015) 4 SCC 237, incident was on 21.09.1990. Tribunal awarded 15 % interest which was reduced to 12% by Gujrat High Court. Court held that it is on higher side and awarded 9 % interest following its decisions in Amresh Kumari Vs Niranjan Lal Jagdish Parshad Jain 2010 ACJ 551 (SC) and Mohinder Kaur Vs Hira Nand Sindhi (2007) ACJ 2123 (SC).
24. In view of above, the rate of interest in the present case, 6 % awarded by Tribunal also cannot be justified and in our view interest should be paid at 9 % per annum."
8. The appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the award of the Tribunal and 4% thereafter. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent.
9. This Court is thankful to Sri Madhav Jain and Sri A.K. Shukla, learned counsels for the parties for getting this old matter disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 DKS