1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 27.03.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar (for short, “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C.P. No.261/1997 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and respondents no.1, original claimant, was awarded total compensation of Rs.2,86,000/ along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs.
2. The facts in brief are that on 07.03.1997. while Bipinbhai son of respondent no. 1 was travelling in a bus bearing no. GJ1V1754, at a particular place, a truck bearing no. GQA 6974, came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the bus. The said Truck was owned by respondent no. 3 and insured with appellant no.1Insurance Company. In the said accident, Bipinbhai sustained severe bodily injuries and ultimately, died. The legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.5.00 Lacs. The said claim petition came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. The main contention raised on behalf of the appellant insurance company is that quantum awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side and that the claimant being father is not entitled for any compensation since he is not dependant. On the aspect of quantum, I find that the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/. However, there is no documentary evidence on record as to on what basis the Tribunal has arrived at the aforesaid figure. Considering the taxable limit for the year in which the accident occurred and the qualification of the deceased, the annual income could be notionally assessed at Rs.40,000/. By adopting the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Road Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, if we deduct 1/2nd amount towards personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs.20,000/ would be the annual loss of dependency benefit. The deceased was 18 years of age at the time of accident and even if we adopt the multiplier of 111, the total income under the head of loss of dependency benefit would come to Rs.2,20,000/. On the other heads an amount of Rs.15,000/ in aggregate under the heads of loss of expectation of life, and funeral expenses. Thus, the claimant shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,35,000/. However, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.2,86,000. Hence, the excess amount of Rs.51,000/ is required to be refunded to the appellant Insurance Company.
4. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the original claimant shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,35,000/ along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The excess amount of Rs.51,000/ shall be refunded to the appellantInsurance Company along with interest which was awarded by the Tribunal. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.]
/phalguni/