1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 11.07.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux,), 10th Fast Track Court, Panchmahal at Godhra in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 2923 of 2003 wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the aforesaid claim petition by awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 700000/ along with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of claim petition till its realization.
2.0 On 17.03.2003, Ramzani Husain Kaledar was passing through Satpul by plying his bicycle. At that time, a truck bearing registration No.
G.J. 6V 8637 dashed with him. As a result of which, the rear wheel of the truck ran over the head of Ramzani Husain and he died on the spot. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 900000/ before the Tribunal wherein the Tribunal has passed the aforesaid award which is challenged in the present appeal by the appellant original opponent No.3.
3.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in considering the prospective income at the rate of Rs. 6000/ per month; that the learned Tribunal committed error in deducting 2/3rd towards personal and living expenses. According to him, 1/3rd should have been deducted in view of principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, since the number of dependent family members is 3.
5.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.
6.0 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
7.0 As far as income in concerned, there is no cogent, reliable evidence with respect to the income. In that view of the matter by considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income of Rs. 3000/ per month. However, the prospective income would come to Rs. 4500/ in view of ratio laid down in case of Sarla Verma( supra). Further, the Tribunal has committed error in deducting 2/3rd towards personal and living expenses. 1/3rd ought to have been deducted towards personal and living expenses since the number dependent family members is 3 in view of the ratio laid down in case of Sarla Verma( supra). By deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, the dependency loss would come to Rs. 3000/ per month and Rs. 36000/ per year. Further, in absence of any evidence with regard to the age of the deceased, the learned Tribunal has considered the age of the deceased as 25 years and applied the multiplier of 14 years which is on lower side. The multiplier of 18 ought to have been applied in view of the ratio laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra). By applying multiplier of 18 years the future loss of income would come to Rs. 648000/ ( Rs. 36000/ x 18). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 672000/ towards future loss of income which is on higher side.
8.0 Further, the claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10000/ under the head of loss of estate, Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra). The amount of Rs. 1000/ towards transportation is just and proper.
9.0 In the premises aforesaid, it is held that appellantinsurance company is liable to pay a compensation of Rs.674000/ ( Rs. 648000/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 10,000/ loss to the estate + Rs. 5000 towards funeral expenses + Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium +Rs. 1000/ for transportation charges). However, the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.700000/. Therefore, an excess amount of Rs. 26000/ ( Rs. 700000/ Rs.674000/) shall be refunded to the appellant along with proportionate costs and interest. The award of the learned Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs. The amount, if any, lying with this Court shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*