1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 23.04.1984 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surendranagar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 365 of 1982 wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the aforesaid claim petition by awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 21000/ along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization with proportionate costs.
2.0 According to the claimants, on 30.04.1982 Premjibhai Govabhai and others were travelling from Ahmedabad to Rajkot in corpse carrier van bearing No. GJG 5669. At about 2.30 p.m. one public carrier bearing No. GRT 4992 came from the wrong side with full speed and dashed with the corpse carrier van. Premjibhai sustained injuries. He died during the treatment. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of claimants for enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellants contended that learned Tribunal erred in computing the income of the deceased at Rs. 435/ and thereby considering the dependency benefit at Rs. 235/ per month; He submitted that the looking to the dependent family members, onethird (1/3rd) ought to have been deducted towards personal and living expenses in view of decision in case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC 121; that multiplier of 5 applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It should be 11 years in view of decision in case of Sarla Verma (supra) since the deceased was aged 55 years.
4.0 Learned advocate appearing for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper.
5.0 Heard learned advocate for the parties and perused the documents on record.
6.0 As far as income is concerned, the learned Tribunal after going into detail accepted only mark 36/5 and Exh. it vide Exh. 102 wherein it was proved that the deceased was earning Rs. 435/ per month. However, learned Tribunal committed error in considering the dependency benefit of Rs. 235/ per month. Since the dependent in the family members are three, onethird (1/3rd) ought to have been deducted towards personal and living expenses in view of principles laid down in case o Sarla Verma ( supra). By deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, the loss of dependency benefit on monthly basis would come to Rs. 290/ and on annual basis it would come to Rs. 3480/ ( Rs.290/ x 12). Looking to the age of the deceased at 55 years, the Tribunal has taken multiplier of 5 which is on lower side. It should be 11 in view of decision in case of Sarla Verma(supra). By applying multiplier of 11, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 38280/ ( Rs. 3480/ x 11).
7.0 Further, the claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10000/ under the head of “loss of estate”, Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra). Thus, the total compensation will be Rs.63280// whereas the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 21100/. Therefore the claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.42180/ ( Rs. 63280/ Rs. 21100/).
8.0 Accordingly it is held that the claimants shall be entitled to a further sum of Rs.42180/ in addition to the amount already awarded to them by the Tribunal. However, the interest on this additional amount will be only 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*