1.0 Since the respondent No. 2 is the legal heir of respondent No.1 (expired), respondent No. 1 is allowed to be deleted.
2.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 28.02.2005, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Kachchh at Bhuj, in M.A.C.P. No. 674 of 2003, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.02,04,500/ to the claimant with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2.0 On 19.08.2003 when one Ramesh along with his father respondent No.1 original claimant was passing on the BhachauDudhai road for going to their home, the auto rickshaw bearing registration No. GJ12V8310 came from wrong side and dashed as a result which Ramesh died in the accident. The respondents No.1 and 2 parents of the deceased preferred the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal for compensation in sum of Rs. 2, 04, 500/.
2.1. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the respective parties and after considering the evidence on record decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellantsoriginal opponent No.3.
3.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence on record. He further contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in not considering that as the age of the deceased was 5 and half years and by applying the multiplier of 15 with the annual income of Rs. 15, 000/ ( as prescribed in the 2nd Schedule of the Act), it comes to Rs. 2, 25,000/ whereas the learned Tribunal has wrongly worked out the figure to Rs.3, 00, 000/.
4.0 I have heard learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and perused the materials produced on record. From the record it is clear that the deceased was aged about five and half years at the time of accident and unemployed person. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by considering the annual income of the deceased of Rs. 15, 000/ per annum. 1/3rd amount is required to be deducted towards his personal expenses, as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC, 121, and therefore the annual income comes to Rs.10,000/. If multiplier of 15 is adopted, as per the decision of Sarla Varma and Others (supra), the net income comes to Rs.1,50,000/. Therefore, the original claimants are entitled to Rs.1,50,000/ towards future loss of income.
5.0 The Tribunal has awarded Rs.4500/ under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, which, in my opinion is just and proper. The original claimants are entitled to compensation in the sum of Rs.1,54, 500/ at the rate of 9% interest from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The excess amount of Rs. 50,000/ will be refunded to the appellantInsurance company, if the same is deposited by the appellantInsurance company with the Tribunal. The rest of the award is not disturbed. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
niru* (K.S.JHAVERI, J.)