1. By way of this appeal, the appellant- Corporation has challenged the judgement and award dated 15.03.1999, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxi.v), Ahmedabad, in M.A.C.P. No.316 of 1996, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 17.8.1995, one Kanuben Patel and his son and others were coming from Abu in an Ambassador car. At that time one S.T. Bus bearing registration No. GJ- I-T-9311 came from opposite direction and dashed the said Ambassador car. As a result of the said accident, Kanubhai and his son died on the spot. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No. 316 of 1999 before the Tribunal for compensation. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the respective parties and after considering the evidence on record passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellant-Corporation.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that without any evidence the Tribunal has assessing the annual income of the deceased at Rs.1,25,0000/-. He further submitted that as per the income tax return at Exh.34, the years income of the deceased was at Rs.31,530/-. He further submitted that the multiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal is on higher side, it should be 14.
4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents have opposed the appeal and have prayed to dismiss the same, as being without merit.
5. I have heard learned advocate appearing for both the parties and perused the material on record. From the record it is clear that the Tribunal has assessed the yearly income of the deceased at Rs.1,25,000/- without any evidence on record. It also appears from the income Tax return at Exh.34, that at the time of accident, the yearly income of the deceased was Rs.31,530/-. Even if liberal view is taken, then also it can be awarded at Rs.32,00,00/-per annum (this cannot be treated as precedent). Since at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 42 years, 30% increase will be applicable in the present case, as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC, 121. The net amount comes to Rs.41,600/- per annum. The claimants are five in number, therefore, ¼ amount is required to be deducted from total dependency. After deducting ¼ amount, annual depdendency comes to Rs.31,200/-.
6. The multiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal is on higher side, it should be 14, in view of the decision of the Sarla Varma(Supra). If the multiplier of 14 is adopted, the total depdendency comes to Rs.4,36,800/-. Even if, Rs.25,000/- is awarded under the head of conventional amount. The total compensation comes to Rs.4,61,800/-. The tribunal has attributed the negligence on the part of the claimant to the extent of 40%, therefore, 40% amount required to be deducted from total compensation.
7. In that view of the matter, the claimant are only entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,77,080/-, whereas the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.9,00,000/-. Therefore, the excess amount of Rs.6,22,920/- is required to be refunded to the appellant-Corporation. However, the appeal is restricted to Rs.4,00,000/-, therefore, the excess amount of Rs.4,00,000/- be refunded to the Appellant-Corporation with interest and cost, if any, if the same is deposited by the appellant-corporation with the tribunal. The amount, if any, lying with the Registry be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.
8. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The decree be drawn accordingly. present appeal is partly allowed.
pawan [K.S.JHAVERI,J.]