1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 04.09.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (AuxII), Ahmedabad ( Rural), Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 490 of 1991 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 96400/at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till realization.
2.0 On 23.02.1991 at about 8.30 p.m. Renukaben along with her maternal aunt and her daughter were walking extremely on the side of the road near Ranip Ambika Tolnaka. At that time the matador No. GRR 5730 came in full speed and in a rash and negligent manner dashed with Renukaben and other two persons who were walking on the side of the road. In the said accident, Renukaben sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same. The legal heirs of the deceased, therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of claimants for the enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned Advocate for the appellants contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in deducting twothird (2/3rd ) for the loss of dependency benefit; that 50% ought to have been deducted towards personal expenses as per principles laid down in case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC 121, since the claimants are the parents of the deceased; that the multiplier of 10 years applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side; that multiplier of 14 ought to have been applied considering the age fo mother as 45 years.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.
5.0 Heard learned advocate for the appellant and perused the documents on record.
6.0 As far as income is concerned the same is not disputed. In absence of any documentary, cogent and reliable evidence with respect to the income, the Tribunal by considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case and nature of work has assessed the income of Rs. 1200/ per month. The deceased was unmarried and the claimants are the parents. Therefore in view of the decision in case Sarla Verma (supra), normally 50% is deducted as personal and living expenses because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend more on herself. Hence, 50% benefit of the compensation should be computed by taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 1200/ as base and the dependency benefits for the claimants would come to Rs. 600/ per month and Rs. 7200/ per year (Rs. 600X 12). In the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shyamsing reported in AIR 2011 SC 3231, the Apex Court has held that while considering the income of the deceased, the age of the mother is required to be considered. Accordingly, in the present case considering the age of the mother as 45 years, the multiplier of 14 would apply. By applying multiplier of 14 years, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 100800/ ( Rs. 7200/ x 14).
7.0 Further, the claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 10,000/ towards loss to the estate and Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra). Thus, the total compensation will be Rs. 115800/ whereas the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 96400/. Therefore the claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.19400/( Rs. 115800/ Rs. 96400/).
8.0 In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants are entitled to a further sum of Rs. 19400/ 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. No order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*