Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company. This is an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, against the impugned award dated 28.8.2009, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Lucknow in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.372 of 2007.
2. The controversy relates to an accident occurred on 2.8.2007 at about 3.30 PM, in which son of the appellant, namely Rama Shanker @ Renu succumbed to injuries on account of accident caused by a truck bearing registration no. UP 78 AT 7325 due to rash and negligent driving, when he was on his way to home on bicycle. The deceased Rama Shanker @ Renu was the sole legal heir and survival of the parents assisting in agriculture work also. Father of the deceased, namely Ram Gopal is aged about 36 years, whereas the deceased was aged about 14 years. The tribunal has recorded the finding that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.1,54,500/- assessing the notional income at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per annum.
3. The respondent-insurance company has not filed any appeal against the finding recorded by the tribunal, hence it seems to attain finality to the extent that the factum of accident is concerned. The present appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation on the ground that compensation to the tune of Rs.,154,500/- is not just and proper as required under section 166/168 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Learned counsel for the appellant has invited attention to a case reported in 2013 ACJ 2594: Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others. On behalf of the respondent- insurance company, Sri Rajesh Nath submits that the deceased was aged about 14 years and being a non-earning member, the tribunal has awarded required compensation, hence the impugned award does not call any interference.
4. It is well settled proposition of law that IInd Schedule of the Motor Vehicle Act has outlived its utility and courts/tribunal may award just and fair compensation in pursuance to power conferred by section 166/168 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant further invited attention to the statement given by P.W.2 Ram Gopal, father of the deceased, who stated on oath that the deceased was aged about 14 years and after college hours he used to assist him in the agriculture work. The assistance provided by deceased/son was valuable one. Apart from the fact that the deceased was sole legal heir and successor of the family, it is not disputed that the work of agriculture requires certain skill and knowledge. Accordingly, the assistance provided by the deceased/son seems to be valuable one for the family.
6. In case of Kishan Gopal (supra), a boy aged about 10 years, assisting his father and mother aged about 36 years in their agriculture work, was found to be valuable for the family. Hon'ble Supreme Court has assessed notional income of the deceased minor son of agriculturist at Rs.30,000/- per annum and by applying multiplier of 15, allowed a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation and Rs.50,000/- under conventional heads for loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, last rites etc. The observation made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) is reproduced as under:-
"Since we have set aside the findings and reasons recorded by both the Tribunal and the High Court on the contentious issue Nos.1 & 2 by recording our reasons in the preceding paragraphs of this judgment and we have answered the point in favour of the appellants and also examined the claim of the appellants to award just and reasonable compensation in favour of the appellants as they have lost their affectionate 10 year old son. For this purpose, it would be necessary for us to refer to Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act, at clause No.6 which refers to notional income for compensation to those persons who had no income prior to accident. The relevant portion of clause No.6 states as under:
"6. Notional income for compensation to those who had no income prior to accident:
..............
(a) Non-earning persons - Rs.15,000/- p.a."
The aforesaid clause of the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the M.V. Act, is considered by this Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., while examining the tortuous liability of the tort-feasor has examined the criteria for awarding compensation for death of children in accident between age group of 10 to 15 years and held in the above case that the compensation shall be awarded taking the contribution of the children to the family at Rs.12,000/- p.a. and multiplier 11 has been applied taking the age of the father and then under the conventional heads the compensation of Rs.25,000/- was awarded. Thus, a total sum of Rs.1,57,000/- was awarded in that case. After noting the submission made on behalf of TISCO in the said case that the compensation determined for the children of all age groups could be double as in its view the determination made was grossly inadequate and the observation was further made that loss of children is irrecoupable and no amount of money could compensate the parents. Having regard to the environment from which the children referred to in that case were brought up, their parents being reasonably well-placed officials of TISCO, it was directed that the compensation amount for the children between the age group of 5 to 10 years should be three times. In other words, it should be Rs.1.5 lakhs to which under the conventional heads a sum of Rs.50,000/- should be added and thus total amount in each case would be Rs.2 lakhs. Further, in the case referred to supra it has observed that in so far as the children of age group between 10 to 15 years are concerned, they are all students of Class VI to Class X and are children of employees of TISCO and one of the children was employed in the Company in the said case having regard to the fact the contribution of the deceased child was taken Rs.12,000/- p.a. appears to be on the lower side and held that the contribution of such children should be Rs.24,000/- p.a. In our considered view, the aforesaid legal principle laid down in Lata Wadhwa's case with all fours is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand having regard to the fact that the deceased was 10 years' old, who was assisting the appellants in their agricultural occupation which is an undisputed fact. We have also considered the fact that the rupee value has come down drastically from the year 1994, when the notional income of the non-earning member prior to the date of accident was fixed at Rs.15,000/-. Further, the deceased boy, had he been alive would have certainly contributed substantially to the family of the appellants by working hard. In view of the aforesaid reasons, it would be just and reasonable for us to take his notional income at Rs.30,000/- and further taking the young age of the parents, namely the mother who was about 36 years old, at the time of accident, by applying the legal principles laid down in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, the multiplier of 15 can be applied to the multiplicand. Thus, 30,000 x 15 = 4,50,000 and 50,000/- under conventional heads towards loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, last rites as held in Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas, which is referred to in Lata Wadhwa's case and the said amount under the conventional heads is awarded even in relation to the death of children between 10 to 15 years old. In this case also we award Rs.50,000/- under conventional heads. In our view, for the aforesaid reasons the said amount would be fair, just and reasonable compensation to be awarded in favour of the appellants. The said amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. by applying the law laid down in the case of Municipal Council of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy5, for the reason that the Insurance Company has been contesting the claim of the appellants from 1992-2013 without settling their legitimate claim for nearly about 21 years, if the Insurance Company had awarded and paid just and reasonable compensation to the appellants the same could have been either invested or kept in the fixed deposit, then the amount could have earned five times more than what is awarded today in this appeal. Therefore, awarding 9% interest on the compensation awarded in favour of the appellants is legally justified."
7. Their Lordships' of Hon'ble Supreme Court awarded an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. The compensation awarded by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) seems to be squarely covered the present case. The age of the deceased (supra) was 10 years and parents' age was 36 years, their Lordships' held that the amount of Rs.4,50,000/- by applying multiplier of 15 should be awarded, in case where the age of the deceased children is between 10-15 years. Accordingly, the present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment. In the present case, we also assess the notional income at Rs.30,000/- per annum and by applying multiplier of 15, award compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- for loss of life.
Apart from Rs.4,50,000/-, under conventional heads for loss of love and affection, funeral expenses, last rites etc. an amount of Rs.50,000/- is also awarded, making total entitlement of the claimant to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-.
8. Accordingly, we allow the present appeal and modify the impugned award to the extent that the claimant shall be entitled for the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- along with 9% interest from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of payment. In terms of the judgment in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) we direct the respondent- insurance company to issue the demand draft drawn on any nationalized bank along with interest in pursuance to modify award, in favour of the claimant and send it to the tribunal within a period of two months and tribunal shall hand over the demand draft to the claimant expeditiously, say within a period of one month.
Let the learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company shall inform about the present order immediately to the insurer.
Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned award stands modified.
Order Date :- 13.5.2014 Ashok Kr.