By way of filing this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the appellant – Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the judgment and award dated 26th February 1990 passed by the learned MAC Tribunal (Main) at Rajkot in MAC Petition No.585 of 1993 vide which the Tribunal awarded Rs.4,40,000 to the claimants. 2 The facts leading to filing the present appeal are to the effect that on 12th August 1993 the claimant, her husband Gordhanbhai and others were travelling in Chakado rickshaw bearing No.GJ.10.T.708 from Gavided to Rajkot at about 3.30 AM. They had purchased wheat and had paid freight for the same and when the said rickshaw reached near the culvert bridge between Bedi and Gavridad an ST Bus was coming from the opposite side and both the vehicles dashed with each other. Because of the impact of the accident the rickshaw turned turtle because of which the incumbents of the rickshaw received grievous injuries. The injured were taken to the hospital where the husband of the claimant was declared as dead. The claimant therefore filed MAC Petition claiming a total compensation of Rs.6 lakhs inter alia contending that the deceased was doing partnership business in the name of Ganesh Industries and he was earning at least of Rs.5,000 to 6,000. He was aged 44 years.
3 The learned Tribunal considering the income of the deceased at Rs.3,500 and Rs.42,000 per annum and after deducting 1/3rd therefrom arrived at a figure of Rs.28,000 per annum as future economic loss. As the deceased was aged 44 years, he adopted the multiplier of 15 and thus awarded Rs.4,20,000. He has also awarded Rs.20,000 for loss of expectation and life amenities. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the appellant – Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has filed this appeal.
4 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as other side and perused the record.
5 Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has committed an error in apportioning 10% of negligence only on the part of the rickshaw driver. He submitted that it should have been 30%. He further submitted that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on higher side and therefore the same is required to be reduced.
6 The Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.3500 per month, which is on the higher side. However, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 the deduction should be 1/4th deduction. Further, considering the evidence, panchnama and everything keeping in mind the width of the road and Bus I am of the opinion that the apportionment of contributory negligence is just and proper.
7 In view of the aforesaid discussion, no interference is called for. The appeal has no merits. However, the rate of interest at 15% awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side. The same is excessive looking to the decisions of the Apex Court and the same shall not be awarded more than 12%. Hence, it is required to be reduced and accordingly the rate of interest awarded is reduced to 12% per annum from 15% in both the appeals. The excess amount of 3% of interest will be refunded back to the appellant-insurance company if the same is deposited by the appellant with the Tribunal.
Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
(K.S.Jhaveri, J.) *mohd