1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 04.01.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Valsad in M.A.C.P. No.394/1993 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and respondent no.1, original claimant, was awarded total compensation of Rs.1,66,000/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of application till its realization and proportionate costs.
2. The facts in brief are that on 22.03.1990 while Bipinbhai, son of respondent no.1 herein, was going to Vansda on a motor-cycle bearing registration No. GJ-15- 0935 for some official work, an ST bus bearing registration No. GQE-9662 driven by respondent no.2 and belonging to the appellant-Corporation, dashed the motor-cycle. In the said accident, Bipinbhai sustained severe bodily injuries and died on the spot. His heir and legal representative, respondent no.1 herein, filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, which 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 appellant. Though served, none appears on behalf of the respondents. It was averred in the claim petition that the deceased was earning Rs.1,000/- as salary by working in a private firm and roughly Rs.1,000/- per month by doing miscellaneous business at his home. However, no documentary evidence was produced by the claimant to prove the income of deceased. But, the Tribunal assessed his prospective income at Rs.2,000/- per month, which is on the higher side, considering the fact that no documentary evidence regarding the proof of income was produced by the claimant. Looking to the facts of the case and since the accident is of the year 1990, in my view, the monthly income of the deceased could be assessed at Rs.1,000/-. Respondent no.1, being the sole dependent and since the deceased was unmarried, ½ is required to be deducted for calculating the dependency benefit in view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Road Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 S.C.C.
121. Thus, the monthly dependency benefit would come to Rs.500/- and the annual dependency benefit at Rs.6,000/-. Considering the age of the deceased at the time of accident, the multiplier of 12 adopted by the Tribunal is just and appropriate and also in consonance with the principle rendered in Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas [(1994) 2 S.C.C. 176]. Thus, the total dependency benefit would come to Rs.72,000/-. However, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,44,000/- under the head of loss of dependency. Therefore, the excess amount of Rs.72,000/- is required to be refunded to the appellant-Corporation. So far as income awarded under other heads are concerned, respondent no.1 shall be entitled for Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. Thus, in all, respondent no.1 shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.87,000/-.
4. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that respondent no.1 herein, original claimant, shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.87,000/- [Rupees Eighty seven thousand only], as against Rs.1,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of application till its realization and proportionate costs. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The excess amount of Rs.79,000/- shall be refunded to the appellant- Corporation. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*