1. In connection with the vehicular accident that took place on 08.10.2003 involving the vehicle (Jeep) and in which minor Lalji died, the legal heirs of deceased preferred claim petition being M.A.C.P. No.680/2003 u/s. 163A of the M.V. Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kachchh at Bhuj. The said claim petition was allowed in part, by judgment and award dated 16.05.2005, whereby, the original claimants were awarded total compensation of Rs.2,04,500/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization. Against the said award, the present appeal has been preferred.
2. It has been contended on behalf of appellant Insurance Company that the claim petition was filed u/s.163A of the M.V. Act and therefore, the Second Schedule appended to the said proviso ought to have followed by the Tribunal while computing compensation rather than applying an independent multiplier. In support of the said submission, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Gurumallamma and another, (2009) 16 S.C.C. 43.
3. Though served, none appears on behalf of the respondents.
4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the facts of the case and the principle laid down in Gurumallamma's case (supra), the formula stipulated in the Second Schedule to Section 163A of the Act is required to be followed for computing compensation. In other words, in a proceeding u/s. 163A of the Act, the amount of compensation is to be determined as per the formula specified in the Second Schedule.
5. Further, in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shyam Singh and others, AIR 2011 S.C. 3231, the Apex Court has held that age of parents is to be taken into consideration while deciding a claim petition filed u/s.163A of the said Act.
6. If we adopt the formula specified in the Second Schedule by considering the age of the mother of deceased at the time of accident, the total compensation would come to Rs.2,30,000/. An amount equivalent to 1/3rd is required to be deducted from the said amount in consideration of the expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining himself had he been alive. Accordingly, the total amount under the head of loss of dependency would come to Rs.1,53,334/.
7. The claimants are also entitled for additional amounts of Rs.2,000/ and Rs.2,500/ under the heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate respectively.
8. Thus, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,57,834/. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.2,04,500/. Hence, the excess amount of Rs.46,666/ is required to be refunded to the appellant Insurance Company.
9. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that original claimants shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,57,83/ only along with interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal. The excess amount of Rs.46,666/ shall be refunded to the appellantInsurance Company along with interest. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.]
/phalguni/