1.0 The above appeals are directed against the common judgement and award dated 22.07.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Nadiad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 506 of 1989 and 513 of 1989 whereby the claim petition preferred by the claimant came to be partly allowed by awarding compensation in the sums of Rs. 1,93,500/ and 64,600/ respectively along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of application till realization.
2.0 The above claim petitions arose out of the same accident. On 07.03.1988 at about 3.00 a.m. Kanji Jvan Aayar who was truck driver of truck No. G.Q.Y 4034 along with the cleaner Harilala who is cleaner was going Netang to Rajkot. When the truck reached near Tarapur Bagodara road, the truck bearing registration No. G.R.R. 5107 came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the truck driven by Kanji Jivan. As a result thereof, Kanji Jivan sustained severe injuries and he died subsequently whereas Harilal Kanji received injuries. Therefore, the heirs of the deceased filed the claim petition No. 506 of 1989 and claimant Harilal filed claim petition No. 513 of 1989, wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. These appeals are at the instance of claimants for enhancement of compensation.
3.0 In First Appeal No. 2485 of 2001, learned advocate for the appellants submitted that the deceased was truck driver of aged 30 years, and he was earning Rs. 1500/ per month; that learned Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/4th towards personal living and expenses instead of 1/3rd and that 18 multiplier ought to have been applied by the learned Tribunal.
4.0 In First appeal No. 2497 of 2001, learned advocate for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in applying multiplier of 15 years. The Tribunal ought to have applied 18 multiplier looking to the age of the claimant at the time of accident.
5.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgment and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeals may be dismissed.
6.0 Heard learned advocate for the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
7.0 So far as First Appeal No. 2485 of 2001 is concerned, from the deposition of Jivabhai Pujabhai ( expired) it is found that the deceased was earning Rs. 1000/ from the truck driving and also Rs 20/ per day for Bhathha. Hence, the deceased was earning Rs. 1600/ per month. Looking to the family member, 1/4th ought to have been deducted towards personal living and expenses. By deduction of 1/4th by considering the income of Rs. 1600/, the loss of dependency benefit would come to Rs. 1200/ per month and Rs. 14400/ per year (Rs.
1200x12). The deceased was aged 30 years at the time of accident. Therefore, by applying multiplier of 17 years in view of decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 the future loss of income would come to Rs. 2,44,800/. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1, 98 000/ for loss of dependency. Thus claimants are entitled to additional amount of .Rs. 46, 800/(Rs. 2, 44, 800/ Rs. 1, 98,000/) under the head loss of dependency benefit.
8.0 Learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium, Rs. 5000/ for loss of love and affection which are just and proper. However, amount of Rs. 2000/ towards funeral expenses is on lower side. It should be Rs. 5000/. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,15, 000/ for compensation.
9.0 The claimants are entitled for Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium, Rs. 10,000/ toward loss of estate and Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses. Therefore, the total compensation would come to Rs. 2, 69, 800/.
10.0 Thus, the claimants are entitled for an additional amount Rs.
54,800 ( Rs. 2,69,800/ Rs. 215000/). However, there is 10% negligence on the part of the claimants. Therefore, claimants are entitled to an amount of Rs. 49,320/ at the rate of 7.5% from the date of making claim petition.
11.0 As far as First Appeal No. 2497 of 2001 is concerned, from the evidence on record it is found that the salary of the claimant was Rs. 1000/. He received 22% disability for the body as a whole. Therefore, there will be loss of income of Rs. 220/ (1000x22%) per month and Rs. 2640/ per year. The age of the claimant was 20 years at the time of accident. Therefore, 18 multiplier ought to have been applied by the learned Tribunal in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma(supra). By applying 18 multiplier,. It would come to Rs. 47,520/ ( Rs. 2640x18). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 39, 600/. Therefore, additional amount of Rs. 7920/ is granted under this head.
12.0 The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1500/ towards attendance charges, Rs. 1500/ towards transportation, Rs. 1500/ towards special diet, Rs. 3000/ for actual loss of income, Rs 10000/ towards pain, shock and suffering and Rs. 7500/ towards medical treatment. In all, by adding Rs. 25,000/ awarded under the above heads, the total amount would come to Rs. 72,520/. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 64,600/. Therefore the claimant shall be entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 7128/ after deducting 10% of negligence along with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition.
13.0 In the result First Appeal No. 2485 of 2001 is partly allowed. It is held that the claimant shall be entitled to additional amount of Rs.53,820/ at the rate of 7.5% from the date of making claim petition. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. No order as to costs.
14.0 First Appeal No. 2487 of 2001 is partly allowed. It is held claimant shall be entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 7128/ along with interest at the rate of 7.5% 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*