1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 17.05.2004, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main.), Jamnagar in M.A.C.P. No. 248 of 1996, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 144950/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2.0 On 17.02.1996, Juma Haji Hingora was driving oil tanker No. GTW 8794 from Kandla to Veraval. When he reached near Junagadh-Vanthali highway, one S.T. Bus No. GJ-1-Z-4096 came on wrong side with full speed and dashed with the tanker. As a result of this, Juma Haji Hingora sustained serious injuries and ultimately succumbed to those injuries. The heirs of the deceased therefore, preferred the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of claimants for enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal committed error in holding that deceased Juma Haji Hingora was negligent to the extent of 35% for the accident and ST bus driver was negligent to the extent of 65%; that learned Tribunal ought to have held that ST bus driver was sole negligent for the accident.
4.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in assessing the income of the deceased Juma Hija Hingora at Rs. 1750/- per month. It was clearly established by evidence that deceased was earning Rs. 2250/- per month + Rs. 50/- as allowance every day; that 1/4th ought to have deducted towards personal and living expenses; that multiplier of 15 applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It should be 16 in view of principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC, 121, since the deceased as aged 35 years at the time of accident.
5.0 Learned advocate appearing for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.
6.0 I have heard learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and perused the materials produced on record.
7.0 As far as negligence is concerned, from the panchnama it appears that tanker was on southern side, i.e correct side of the road. However, to drive a vehicle on correct side of the road only is not the prudent driving of the vehicle. In the circumstances which took place at the time of accident, tanker-driver who must have seen S.T. Bus coming from the opposite side, could have either slowed down the speed of his tanker or had halted on the extremely left side of the road for a while to avert any dashing with the oncoming S.T. Bus. From the panchnama, it appears that the S.T. Bus sustained damaged to the extent of 40000/.- while tanker sustained danger to the extent of Rs. 6000/- The Tribunal after considering in detail has rightly held that there was negligence of S.T. Bus driver to the extent of 65% and that of tanker -driver to the extent of 35% for causing the accident.
8.0 As far as income is concerned, there is no cogent, reliable evidence with respect to the income. In that view of the matter by considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of Rs. 1750/- per month. The learned Tribunal has committed error by deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses. 1/4th ought to have deducted since there are four dependent family member as per the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra). Therefore, by deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses, the dependency loss would come to Rs.1312.5/- per month and Rs. 15750/- per annum. Since the deceased was aged 35 years at the time of accident, the multiplier of 15 years applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. There should be multiplier of 16. By applying multiplier of 16 years in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma (Supra) the future loss of income would come to Rs.252000/- ( Rs. 15750/- x 16)-. Adding thereto, the amount of Rs. 10000/- for loss to the estate, Rs. 10000/- for loss of consortium and Rs. 5000/- as funeral expenses in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma(supra), the total compensation would come to Rs. 277000/-. After deducting 35% on account of negligence on the part of the deceased, the total amount would come to Rs.180050/- (Rs.277000/-Rs.96950/-). The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 144950/-. Therefore the claimants are entitled to additional amount of Rs. 35100/- ( Rs. 180050/- - Rs. 144950/-).
9.0 In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. It is held that a further sum of Rs.35100/-
shall be paid to the claimants 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 filing of the claim petition. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru* Top