1. The appellants herein have challenged the award dated 16.09.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) Jamnagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 387/1991 so far as the Tribunal awarded only Rs. 1,20,000/-as compensation with interest and costs.
2. The claimants had filed claim petition to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- in respect of the vehicular accident which occurred on 12.06.2005 while one Shri Altaf Jamal was travelling on scooter as a pillion rider driven by original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner as a result of which he lost control over the scooter and the scooter fell from the bridge. As a result of the said accident, Shri Altaf expired. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Mr. Shaikh, learned advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the appellant and not considered the prospective income. He submitted that the dependency loss is also on lower side. He submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly considered the multiplier considering the age of the deceased.
4. Ms. Hingorani, learned advocate appearing for Ms. Bhaya for the respondent insurance company supported the award of the Tribunal and submitted that the same does not call for any interference by this Court. She submitted that in fact in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors Vs. Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr. Reported in 2009(6) SCC 121, the Tribunal has assessed multiplier on higher side.
5. This Court heard the contentions advanced by the parties and perused the papers on record. The Tribunal has gone through the documentary evidence on record and has come to the conclusion that the accident in question happened due to the negligence of the original opponent no. 1. No interference is called for regarding the same.
6. As far as the aspect of quantum of compensation is concerned, it is clear that the Tribunal has considered the evidence on record. The Tribunal has considered the futuer income of the deceased as Rs. 1000/- per month which is on lower side. Considering the monthly income of Rs. 1200/- as recorded by the Tribunal, the prospective income comes to Rs. 1800/- (1200+1200+1200=3600/2) in view of decision of Sarla Verma (supra). Considering mother as the claimant, deduction of half of income is required to be done towards personal expenses and accordingly the dependency loss per month shall come to Rs. 900/- per month and Rs. 10800/- per annum.
6.1 In the case of Sarla Verma & Ors (supra) it is held as under:
“The multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M- 17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years and M- 13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M- 9 for 56 to 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.”
6.2 As per the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), I am of the view that, looking to the age of the claiamnt, the multiplier of 15 awarded in the present case is on lower side. The just and proper multiplier would be 13. The income assessed is just and proper. Therefore the future loss of dependency would come to Rs. 1,40,400/- (Rs.10800 x 13).
7. As far as the amount awarded under the other heads is concerned, the claimants shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 25000/- towards conventional expenses. Therefore, in all the claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 1,65,400/- as compensation. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 120000/- as compensation and therefore an additional amount of Rs. 45,400/- is required to be awarded.
8. Accordingly, appeal is partly allowed. The appellant shall be entitled to an additional amount of Rs. 45,400/- alongwith interest at 7.5% from the date of application till realisation. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//