1. The appellants herein have challenged the award dated 30.04.1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Asst.), Kutch- Bhuj in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 115 of 1991 so far as the Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,24,000/- by way of compensation to the original claimants along with 15% interest.
2. It is the case of the appellants that on 21.09.1990 while the deceased was walking, a truck bearing registration no. GQY 4701 driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner as a result of which the deceased sustained serious injuries. She succumbed to those injuries. The claimants being legal heirs and representatives of the deceased therefore filed claim petition for compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Mr. G.C. Mazmudar, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal erred in quantifying the award at Rs. 2,24,000/- . He submitted that the dependency loss of Rs. 2,16,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and therefore the same is required to be reduced. He also submitted that the Tribunal erred in not deducting 1/3 for personal expenses. He further submitted that even the interest of 15% awarded is on higher side.
4. Mr. Shah, learned advocate appearing for the respondent 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 awarded lesser amount under the head of loss of estate and the same is required to be in fact enhanced.
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 truck. However, the dependency loss assessed by the Tribunal seems to be on a higher side. The income of the claimant is assessed at Rs. 900/-. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt Sarla Dixit & Anr Vs. Balwant Yadav & Ors, reported in 1996 AIR 1274 even if the income is doubled and added to the same, it comes to 2700 and dividing the same by 2 comes to Rs. 1350/- per month and Rs. 16,200/-.
6. Considering the dependents being two in number, deducting 1/3rd from the total income for personal expenses, the amount dependency loss per annum shall come to Rs. 1,08,000/- (Rs. 16200- Rs. 5400). The multiplier of 18 adopted in the present case is just and proper and accordingly the future dependency loss shall come to Rs. 1,94,400/-. Against this, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,16,000/- which is excessive.
7. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5000/- for loss to estate. The contention of learned advocate for the claimants is required to be accepted. The same is on lower side. An amount of Rs. 10000/- ought to have been granted. Hence, Rs. 5000/- additional is required to be awarded to the claimants under the said head. Even Rs. 5000/- ought to have been awarded under the head of funeral expenses. Therefore the claimants are in all entitled to Rs. 2,09,400/- as compensation (Rs. 1,94,400 for future loss of income + Rs. 10000 under loss of estate + Rs. 5000 under the head of funeral expenses). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,24,000/-. Therefore an amount of Rs. 14,600/- is awarded to the claimants in excess and the same is required to be refunded to the appellants.
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. 2,09,400/- by way of total compensation. The appellant shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% instead of 15% from the date of claim petition till realisation. The amount deposited by the appellants qua 3% interest shall be refunded. The balance amount along with proportionate interest shall be refunded to the appellants. 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//