1. By way of this appeal, the appellants- original opponent Nos.2 and 3 have challenged the judgement and award dated 12.01.1996, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxiliary), Kachchh at Bhuj, in M.A.C.P. No.356 of 1998, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 15% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 8.6.1988, one Valji Gadhavi was returning on his motor cycle from Mandvi to Jinalaya situated on mandvi-Bhuj road. At that time one tanker bearing registration No. GTY 6690 came from wrong side and dashed with the said motorcycle. As a result of the said accident, Valji Gadhavi sustained grievous injuries and due to which he died. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No.356 of 1988 before the Tribunal for compensation.
2.1. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the respective parties and after considering the evidence on record and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellants-
original opponent Nos.2 and 3.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in holding Insurance Company liable from making compensation. He further contended that in view of the FIR lodged by the head constable on the same day i.e. on the date of accident, wherein it has been clearly stated that the accident has happened because of negligence on the part of the deceased himself and no other vehicle was involved in this accident. He further contended that the Tanker was not involved in the accident.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing monthly income at Rs.3000/- without any documentary evidence. He further contended that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is on higher side. He further contended that the 15% interest awarded by the Tribunal is also on higher side. Therefore, he prayed to allow this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the contentions of learned advocate for the appellants and contended that the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has passed the impugned award, therefore, he prayed to dismiss the present appeal.
6. I have heard learned advocates for both the parties and perused the material on record. On the point of involvement of the vehicle. In view of the FIR vehicle was not involved but the witness was confronted with the FIR. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal has justifying in holding that the Insurance Company is liable to make compensation. However, on the point of monthly income, I am of the opinion that Rs.3000/- assessed by the Tribunal is admittedly on higher side, if liberally view is taken it can be awarded Rs.18,000/- per annum (this cannot be treated as precedent) and after applying the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Dixit and Another Vs. Balwant Yadav and another reported in (1996) 3 SCC 179. If it is doubled and added the income the net amount comes to Rs. 27,000/- per annum towards dependency. After deducting 1/5 amount, since the claimants seven in number, the amount the dependency comes to Rs. 21,600/- per annum. I find that the multiplier of 12 adopted by the Tribunal is on higher side. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Dixit(Supra), the multiplier of 9 is just and appropriate, since the deceased was 60 years at the time of accident, as per the Postmortem report. If multiplier of 9 is adopted, the amount comes to Rs.1,94,400/-.
7. The claimants are further entitled to Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss to the estate + Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. Thus, in all the claimants are only entitled to Rs.2,9,400/- for compensation, whereas the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is also on higher side. Therefore, it is reduced to 12%.
8. In that view of the matter, the excess amount of Rs. 90,6000/- will be refunded to the appellants with interest and cost, if any, if the same is deposited by the appellant with the tribunal.
9. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. Decree be drawn accordingly. The present appeal is partly allowed.
pawan [K.S.JHAVERI,J.]