[1] This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 18.05.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Godhra at Panchmahalas in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1057/1993 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,87,500/- along with the proportionate cost and interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application till realization.
[2] According to the claimants, on 19.05.1993, the claimant No.1 - appellant No.1 herein was going towards Village Boradi from her residence and she was traveling as a pillion rider on motor cycle of the opponent No.1. At that time, when bump came, claimant No.1 fell down from the rear seat of the motor cycle and received serious injuries on her knees, on her head and other parts of the body. Initially, she was treated at Boradi and thereaafter she shifted to the cottage hospital at Dahod. From there, she was shifted to Rly. Hospital at Dahod where she died on 21.05.1993. Therefore, the claimants filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal at the instance of the claimant for enhancement of compensation.
[3] The learned advocate for the appellants submitted that due to accident, the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding Rs.10,000/- for shock and suffering instead of Rs.15,000/- and also in awarding a sum of Rs.3,000/- as burial expenses. He further submitted that considering the earning of the deceased at the time of her death and considering the future income which would have earned at the time of her superannuation, the Tribunal could have safely assessed Rs.4,600/- being prospective income. It is submitted that the appellants have examined proper witness, who in his deposition has stated that on the date of superannuation, i.e. on 30.06.2012, the deceased would have earned Rs.7,736/-. It is submitted that in view of the ratio adopted by the Tribunal of 2/3rd dependency, the dependency could have been put at Rs.3,100/- per month. The Tribunal has committed an error in applying multiplier of 11 only. He lastly urged that the award is required to be enhanced.
[4] Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the relevant records.
[5] Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that in view of the principles laid down in the case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, the Tribunal has committed an error in applying the multiplier of 11. As per the award of the Tribunal, the dependency to the claimants is considered Rs.2600/- p.m and yearly the same would come to Rs.31200/-, but the considering the age of the deceased at the time of accident, the multiplier of 14 is required to be adopted and, therefore, the future dependency comes to Rs.4,36,800/-. The Tribunal has considered the amount under the different heads are just and proper and Rs.3,000/- is required to be considered as medical expenses. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation an amount of Rs.3,43,200/-. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to get an additional amount of Rs.1,39,900/- along with the interest @ 7.5% from the date of application. The judgment and award is modified to the aforesaid extent. The appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
[ K. S. JHAVERI, J. ] vijay Top