1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 28.03.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux1), Kachchh at Bhuj in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 121 of 1993 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 351000/ with running interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till realization.
2.0 On 27.08.1992 Menand Jesang alias Gabhabhai Marand who was drivercumcleaner was returning in truck No. G.T.Y. 7386. The driver of the said truck drove the vehicle in full speed. At 4.30 hours, when the truck reached near the sign board of village Sikarpur on National Highway No.8A, one truck bearing registration No. MP09D8317 came from opposite direction with full speed and in a rash and negligent manner. The driver of the Truck No. GTY 7386 lost control over the vehicle and dashed with truck No. MP09D8317. Menand Jesang sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the said injuries on 31.08.1992. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed the aforesaid claim wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of claimants for the enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal committed error in considering the income of Rs. 1500/ per month and thereby prospective income to only Rs. 2250/ per month; that multiplier of 17 years is on lower side. It should be 18 in view of the decision in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.
5.0 Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the document on record.
6.0 As far as income is 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 income of Rs. 1500/ per month and Rs. 2250/ per month and Rs. 27000/ as prospective income. By deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, the dependency loss would come to Rs. 1500/ per month and Rs. 18000/ per year. On perusal of School Leaving Certificate it transpired that the deceased was 22 years at the time of accident. The multiplier of 17 applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side and it should be 18. By applying multiplier of 18 years in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma (supra) the future loss of income would come to Rs. 324000/. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 306000/ which is on lower side.
7.0 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. 15000/ towards pain, shock and suffering, Rs. 5000/ towards medical treatment and Rs.5000/ towards transportation are just and proper. Thus, the total compensation will be Rs.374000/ whereas the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 351000/. Therefore the claimants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.23,000/ .
8.0 In the premises aforesaid, it is held that claimant are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 374000/ ( Rs. 324000/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 10,000/ loss to the estate + Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses + Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium + Rs. 15000/ towards pain, shock and suffering + Rs. 5000/ towards medical treatment + Rs.5000/ towards transportation). However, the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 351000/. Therefore, a further sum of Rs.23000/ shall be paid to the claimants in addition to the amount already awarded to them by the Tribunal. However, the interest on this additional amount will be only 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*