Court No. - 22
RESERVED ON 20.12.2018 DELIVERED ON 25.02.2019
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1501 of 2004
Appellant :- Brahma Dev Singh
Respondent :- The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Ors. Counsel for Appellant :- A.L. Jaiswal,Sharve Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Arun Prakash
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard Sri Sharve Singh, counsel for the appellant and Sri Arun Prakash, counsel for the Insurance Company, i.e., respondent no. 1.
The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the claimants praying to enhance the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, District Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as, 'Tribunal') through its impugned award dated 23.3.2004 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 810 of 2000. Through its aforesaid award, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.70,000/- to the claimants for the death of their six year old daughter in an accident caused by the vehicle of respondent nos. 2 and 3.
Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 810 of 2000 was instituted by the claimants praying for compensation of Rs.6,60,000/- for the death of their daughter Kr. Subi on 1.11.2000 in an accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of Vehicle No. U.P.-70 K-9111. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 are the owners of the vehicle which was insured with respondent no. 1. In its award dated 23.3.2004, the Tribunal framed Issues regarding the factum of accident, the negligence of the driver of the Vehicle No. U.P.-70 K-9111 in causing the accident, the inter se liability of the respondents to pay compensation to the claimants as well as the amount of compensation payable to the claimants. In its award dated 23.3.2004, the Tribunal decided the Issues regarding factum of accident and the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle in causing the accident in favour of the claimants and also held the Insurance Company liable to pay compensation to the claimants because at the time of accident, the vehicle was insured with respondent no. 1/Insurance Company and the driver of the vehicle had a valid driving license. However, the Tribunal, without applying the multiplier method and without determining the multiplicand in the case, awarded an amount of Rs.70,000/- to the claimants for the death of their six year old daughter.
It was argued by the counsel for the claimants/appellant that compensation in case of death of a child due to accident has to be determined on the notional income of Rs.30,000/- per annum and after applying the multiplier method as laid down by the Supreme Court in its different judgments. It was argued by the counsel for the appellant that the claimants were also entitled to separate amounts as compensation under the conventional heads which the Tribunal has not awarded through its award dated 23.3.2004. It was argued that for the aforesaid reasons, the claimants are entitled to a higher compensation than what has been awarded by the Tribunal and the award dated 23.3.2004 passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified by increasing the compensation amount.
A reading of the award dated 23.3.2004 passed by the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal has determined the compensation without applying the multiplier method. The aforesaid approach of the Tribunal is contrary to law as laid down by the Supreme Court in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation vs Susamma Thomas (Mrs) & Ors. 1994 (2) SCC 176 wherein the Supreme Court held that the proper method to determine compensation was the multiplier method as it introduces consistency, uniformity and an element of predictability in assessment of compensation. Thus, the compensation, in the present case, had also to be assessed by applying the multiplier method.
In Kishan Gopal & Anr. vs Lala & Ors. 2014 (1) SCC 244, the Supreme Court observed that in cases of death of children, it would be just and reasonable to assess the compensation on the basis of a notional income of Rs.30,000/- per annum and after applying a multiplier of 15. In Kishan Gopal (supra), the accident and consequential death occurred on 19.7.1997. In the present case, the accident and consequential death occurred on 1.11.2000. The aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court was also followed by a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment and order dated 14.2.2017 passed in First Appeal From Order No. 1580 of 1993 (Nagma Bano vs Harish Chandar Gupta & 3 Ors.). Thus, in the present case, the pecuniary damages payable to the claimants due to the death of their daughter in an accident was also to be calculated according to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Kishan Gopal (supra) and followed by the Division Bench of this Court in Nagma Bano (supra). For the aforesaid reasons, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- as pecuniary damages for the death of their daughter in the accident.
Apart from the pecuniary damages, the claimants are also entitled to compensation for non-pecuniary damages. In accordance with the judgments of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- as funeral expenses. Apart from the aforesaid, the claimants are also entitled to a compensation of Rs.40,000/- each for loss of Filial Consortium as awarded in Magma General Insurance (supra), i.e. a total of Rs.80,000/- for loss of Filial Consortium and Rs.50,000/- each, i.e. a total of Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of love and affection due to the death of their daughter.
Thus, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.6,60,000/- (pecuniary damages + loss of estate + funeral expenses + loss of Filial Consortium + loss of love and affection, i.e., Rs.4,50,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.80,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/-). The award of the Tribunal is accordingly modified to the aforesaid extent. It is clarified that the amount awarded by this Court shall carry the same interest as awarded by the Tribunal vide its award dated 23.3.2004.
With the aforesaid directions, the appeal is allowed and the award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the enhanced/balance amount of compensation to the claimants along with interest as aforesaid within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Tribunal.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Satyam