1. These appeals arise out of the common judgment and award dated 18.11.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar in M.A.C.P. No.445/1995, 446/1995 & 332/1996 whereby, the claim petitions were allowed in part as under;
(I) In M.A.C.P. No.445/1995 an amount of Rs.10,20,000/- was awarded.
(ii) In M.A.C.P. No.446/1995 an amount of Rs.6,20,000/- was awarded.
(iii) In M.A.C.P. No.332/1995 an amount of Rs.3,10,000/- was awarded.
On the aforesaid amount of compensation, the claimants were also awarded interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs.
2. The aforesaid claim petitions were filed in connection with the vehicular accident that took place on 13.09.1995 at around 1730 hrs. on the Bhavnagar – Rajkot Highway in which two persons, viz. Raghavbhai Kalubhai Gopani and Bharatbhai Jadavbhai Gohil, had died and Rameshkumar Jairamsingh had sustained severe bodily injuries. The legal heirs of deceased and the injured had filed the aforesaid claim petitions, which were allowed in part, by way of the impugned award.
3. The main contention raised on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company is that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and also contrary to the evidence on record and the law on the subject. It is submitted that the Tribunal seriously erred in assessing the aspect of income in all the claim petitions. It is also submitted that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is also on the higher side.
4. Learned counsel for respondent-claimants supported the impugned award and submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and legal and also in consonance with the evidence on record. He, therefore, requested to reject the appeals.
5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
M.A.C.P. No.445 of 1995 :
6. In this claim petition, the claimants had produced on record the Income-Tax Returns for the relevant years. The accident in question took place in September 1995 and therefore, we are concerned with the Returns of that particular year only. As per the Returns of the year 1994- 1995, which was produced vide Exhibit-41, the net annual income from Business is shown to be Rs.40,410/-. The annual income from Agriculture is shown to be Rs.45,159/-. On that basis, the Tribunal assessed the annual income of deceased at Rs.86,000/-.
7. Here, it is pertinent to note that the Tribunal has not deducted any amount under the head of “labour costs” from the “Agricultural income” and has proceeded on the basis of Gross Income and not Net Income. Considering the evidence on record, the annual Net Income from Agriculture could be taken at Rs.18,000/-. Thus, the total income would come to Rs.58,410/- [40,410 + 18,000], which is rounded off to Rs.58,000/-. A rise of 30% in income is to be taken in view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Road Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 and since the deceased was 42 years of age at the time of accident. Therefore, the gross annual income would come to Rs.75,400/-.
8. The total number of dependents is six and therefore, an amount equivalent to 1/4th is required to be deducted towards personal living expenses of deceased for calculating loss of dependency. If we deduct the said amount, the annual loss of dependency would come to Rs.56,550/-. Considering the age of deceased at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier is 14. By adopting the said multiplier, the total amount under the head of loss of dependency would come to Rs.7,91,700/-.
9. The claimants are entitled to get Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of Estate, Rs.10,000/- towards conventional amount and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the claimants are entitled to get total compensation of Rs.8,16,700/- [7,91,700 + 25,000].
M.A.C.P. No.446 of 1995 :
10. In this claim petition, the Tribunal has assessed the annual prospective income of deceased at Rs.60,000/-. The monthly income of deceased was claimed to be Rs.4,000/-, for which the salary slip was produced on record at Exhibit-63, However, there is no documentary evidence, in the form of Income-Tax Returns, to prove the income of deceased. In such circumstance, the Tribunal ought not to have assessed the annual income at Rs.60,000/-. For the relevant year, i.e. 1994-1995, the taxable income limit was Rs.35,000/-. In view of the above scenario, it would be appropriate to assess the annual income of deceased at Rs.35,000/- instead of Rs.60,000/-.
11. In this case also, the total number of dependents is six and therefore, an amount equivalent to 1/4th is required to be deducted towards personal living expenses of deceased for calculating loss of dependency. If we deduct the said amount, the annual loss of dependency would come to Rs.26,250/-. Considering the age of deceased at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier is 17. By adopting the said multiplier, the total amount under the head of loss of dependency would come to Rs.4,46,250/-.
12. The claimants are entitled to get Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of Estate, Rs.10,000/- towards conventional amount and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the claimants are entitled to get total compensation of Rs.4,71,250/- [4,46,250 + 25,000].
M.A.C.P. No.332 of 1996 :
13. In this claim petition, I find that the Tribunal has appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has awarded compensation, which, in my view, is just, legal and appropriate. Learned counsel for the appellant was not in a position to point out any illegality or impropriety having been committed by the Tribunal while awarding total compensation of Rs.3,10,000/-. Hence, I find no reasons to disturb the impugned award so far as the amount of compensation is concerned.
14. On the aspect of rate of interest, I find that the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 15% per annum, in all the claim petitions, is on the higher side. In my opinion, it would be appropriate to award interest at the rate of 12% per annum considering the present day scenario. Hence, the rate of interest is modified and the claimants shall now be entitled for interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the total amount of compensation.
15. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is passed;
(i) F.A. No.1269/1997 is partly allowed. The impugned award passed in M.A.C.P. No.445/1995 is modified to the extent that the respondents, original claimants, shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.8,16,700/- [Rupees Eight lacs sixteen thousand seven hundred only] along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum calculated from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs. The excess amount of Rs.2,03,300/- shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company along with interest and cost.
(ii) F.A. No.1270/1997 is partly allowed. The impugned award passed in M.A.C.P. No.446/1995 is modified to the extent that the respondents, original claimants, shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,71,250/- [Rupees Four lacs seventy one thousand two hundred fifty only] along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum calculated from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs. The excess amount of Rs.1,48,750/- shall be refunded to the appellant- Insurance Company along with interest and cost.
(iii) F.A. No.1271/1997 is partly allowed. The impugned award passed in M.A.C.P. No.332/1996 is modified to the extent that the rate of interest is reduced to 12% per annum instead of 15% per annum. Rest of the impugned award remains unaltered so far as the present claim petition is concerned.
(iv) All the appeals are, accordingly, disposed of. Registry is directed to transmit the amount lying with this Court to the Tribunal concerned forthwith. No order as to costs.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]
Pravin/*