1. In connection with the vehicular accident that occurred on 18.02.2000 at around 1300 hrs. on the Naroda – Narol Expressway near Jashodanagar cross- roads, involving an ST Bus bearing registration No. GJ- 18-V-2650 and in which the son of the original claimants expired, the appellants, who are the parents of the deceased, preferred a claim petition being M.A.C.P. No.140/2000 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad claiming total compensation of Rs.6.00 Lacs. The said claim petition came to be disposed of by judgment and award dated 03.01.2003 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and the appellants were awarded total compensation of Rs.87,200/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs.
2. Being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the appellants have preferred the present appeal for enhancement.
3. The main grounds under which the appellants have prayed for enhancement is that the assessment of prospective income made by the Tribunal is on the lower side and that the deduction of 2/3rd made by the Tribunal for calculating dependency benefit is erroneous in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Road Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121. It is, therefore, submitted that the amount under the above head deserves to be enhanced.
4. Per contra, it has been submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and appropriate and therefore, this Court may not disturb the same. It is contended that the amount of Rs.10,000/- awarded under the head of funeral expenses is on the higher side and contrary to the decision rendered in Sarla Verma's case (supra). Hence, the same deserves to be reduced.
5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It appears from the record that the claimants had examined witness – Harishbhai (Exhibit-19) to prove income of the deceased. The said witness was said to be the employer of deceased, who had issued the Certificate (Exhibit-20) stating that the deceased was earning salary of Rs.3,000/- per month. However, it is to be noted that except the above Certificate, the witness had not produced any other evidence, viz. receipts of salary or wages paid to deceased, to show that he was the employer of the deceased. From the evidence of the said witness, it has come out that he was not paying any income-tax and therefore, the Tribunal found his evidence to be non-trustworthy and accordingly, did not believe the salary certificate Exhibit-20. The Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs.1,500/- on the basis that at the time of accident the deceased was 28 years of age and minimum wage was Rs.50/- per day. In my opinion, the assessment of income at Rs.1,500/- per month made by the Tribunal is just, legal and appropriate. On that basis, the Tribunal assessed his prospective income at Rs.2,250/-, as per the principle rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Dixit v. Balwant Yadav and Another, 1996 (3) SCC 179.
6. However, while calculating dependency benefit, I find that the Tribunal has committed serious error in deducting 2/3rd amount instead of ½ in view of the principle rendered in Sarla Verma's case (supra). Thus, by deducting ½ amount, the monthly dependency benefit would come to Rs. 1,125/- and annual dependency at Rs.13,500/-. Considering the age of parents, the appropriate multiplier would be 9. By adopting the said multiplier, the total income under the head of dependency benefit would come to Rs.1,21,500/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.67,200/- under the above head and therefore, the appellants shall be entitled to additional amount of Rs.54,300/- under the head of loss of dependency benefit.
7. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- under the head of funeral expenses, which is contrary to the decision rendered in Sarla Verma's case (supra) wherein, Rs.5,000/- has been awarded under the said head. Hence, instead of Rs.10,000/-, the appellants shall be entitled for Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. They shall also be entitled for Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of expectation of life, which has already been awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, in all, the appellants shall be entitled for additional compensation of Rs.49,300/-.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellants, original claimants, shall be entitled for additional compensation of Rs.49,300/- [Rupees Forty nine thousand three hundred only] along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till its realization over and above the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*