1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 22.12.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Sabarkantha at camp Idar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 124 of 2007 wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the aforesaid claim petition by awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 208500/ along with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of application till realization.
2.0 On 09.12.2006 at about 9.00 a.m. Bhagora Savitben Rameshbhai was going to take grass by walking on correct side of the VijynagarIdar road. At that time, respondent No. 1 came with Tempo No. GJ9V5184 from Vijaynagar towards Idar side in full speed and in rash and negligent manner dashed with Savitaben causing her serious injuries. She was taken to hospital and ultimately she died during the medical treatment. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of the appellants for enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellants contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in considering the notional income as Rs.15000/ per year though in the affidavit at Exh. 45 of the claimants it was stated that deceased was earning Rs. 6000/ per month by doing agriculture and making PadilaPatrala. According to him, by assessing the income of Rs. 6000/ per month and Rs. 72000/ per year and by deducting 1/5th towards personal and living expenses, the annual dependency loss would come to Rs. 57600/. By applying multiplier of 17, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 979200/ ( Rs, 57600/ x 17). He further submitted that an amount of Rs. 4500/ towards other heads are on lower side.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the income assessed by the learned Tribunal is and proper and no interference is require to be warranted.
5.0 Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents on record.
6.0 As far as income is concerned, the learned Tribunal in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence has rightly assessed the notional income of Rs. 15000/ per year. After deducting 1/5th towards personal and living expenses, the loss of dependency benefit would come to Rs.12000/ per years. The learned Tribunal has applied multiplier of 17 which is on higher side. It should be 16 in view of decision of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121.. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the same is not disturbed. Therefore, by applying multiplier of 17, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 204000/. (12000/ x 17).
7.0 Further, the appellants are entitled for Rs .10000/ towards loss to the estate, Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium.
8.0 In the result, the appellants are entitled to compensation in the sum of Rs. 229000/( Rs. 204000/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 10000/ towards loss to the estate + Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses + Rs. 10000/ loss of consortium). However, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 208500/ as total compensation. Therefore, it is held that the appellants shall be awarded a further sum of Rs. 20500/( Rs. 229000/ Rs. 208500/) 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*