1. The appellants herein have challenged the award dated 08.07.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 421 of 1992 so far as the Tribunal awarded Rs. 5,00,000/- by way of compensation to the original claimants along with 15% interest.
2. It is the case of the appellants that on 31.05.1992 while the claimant no. 1 was riding pillion on a bicycle, a tempo bearing registration no. GJ-4-T 4645 driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, hit the bicycle as a result of which the claimant no. 1 was thrown on the road and he sustained serious injuries. The claimants therefore filed claim petition for compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Mr. Vyas, learned advocate appearing for Mr. Rajni Mehta for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal erred in quantifying the award at Rs. 5,00,000/- . He submitted that the award of the Tribunal is grossly exaggerated. He submitted that the Tribunal future loss of income of Rs. 2,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and therefore the same is required to be reduced. He submitted that considering the income of Rs. 15000 in the year 1994, the Tribunal ought to have reduced the same by 20% for considering the income in the year 1992 which comes to around 12000/- per annum. To this even if the disability is considered at 90%, the loss of income per annum shall come to Rs. 1,08,000/-. The multiplier of 15 as adopted by the Tribunal if accepted as it is shall give only Rs. 1,62,000/- as future loss of income whereas the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,70,000/-.
3.1 He also submitted that the Tribunal erred in awarding Rs. 25000/- for bleak future of the claimant which is nothing but duplication of future loss of income. He further submitted that the Tribunal also erred in awarding Rs. 50000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life when already an amount under pain, shock and suffering is awarded. He further submitted that even the interest of 15% awarded is on higher side and deserves to be reduced.
4. Learned advocate appearing for the respondents supported the impugned award and submitted that the award having been passed after considering the evidence in detail does not call for any interference by this Court. He submitted that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the dependency loss. He submitted that the Tribunal in fact has rightly assessed 100% disability in view of the division bench judgement of this Court passed in First Appeal No. 2071 of 2005 on 23.12.2011.
5. The Tribunal has gone into the evidence in detail and has come to the conclusion that the accident in question happened because of the negligence of the driver of the tempo. However, the dependency loss assessed by the Tribunal seems to be on a higher side. The income of the claimant is assessed at Rs. 15000/- per annum. The same is just and proper. Nothing is pointed out to take a contrary view. In view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court passed on 23.12.2011 in First Appeal No. 2071 of 2005, the disability of 100% is required to be accepted. Therefore, the loss of income shall come to Rs. 15000/- per annum. Considering multiplier of 15 as adopted by the Tribunal, the future loss of income comes to Rs. 2,25,000/-. Against this, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,70,000/- and therefore Rs. 45,000/- is excessive.
6. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 25000/- for bleak future, and Rs. 50000/- for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The contention of learned advocate for the appellants is required to be accepted. The amount under the head of bleak future ought not to have been paid when future loss of income and amount for loss of marriage prospects is paid. Similarly, amount under the head of enjoyment of life ought not to have been awarded.
7. Therefore the claimants are in all entitled to Rs. 3.80,000/- as compensation (Rs. 2,25,000 for future loss of income + Rs. 25,000 for loss of marriage prospects + Rs. 40000 for transportation + Rs. 50000 for pain shock and suffering + Rs. 40000 for medical expenses ). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,00,000/-. Therefore an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- is awarded to the claimants in excess and the same is required to be refunded to the appellant-insurance company.
8. The interest of 15% imposed by the Tribunal is on a higher side. This court is of the view that interest of 12% ought to have been imposed by the Tribunal. The award is required to be modified to the aforesaid extent.
9. Accordingly, appeal is partly allowed. The claimants shall be entitled to only Rs. 3,80,000/- by way of total compensation. The appellants shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% instead of 15% from the date of claim petition till realisation. The excess amount deposited by the appellant – insurance company qua 3% interest shall be refunded. The balance amount along with proportionate interest shall be refunded to the appellants- insurance company. The proportionate amount in FDR shall be paid to the claimants. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. No order as to costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//