Court No. - 3
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1075 of 1999 Appellant :- Sarla Agarwal And Others Respondent :- M/S Raghuwar Dayal And Others Counsel for Appellant :- M.K. Gupta,Pankaj Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- Dhananjay Awasthi
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for appellants and perused the material on record. None present for respondent even today.
2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 7.07.1999 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/IInd Additional District Judge, Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in Claim Petition No.329 of 1995 awarding a sum of Rs.90,000/- with interest at the rate of 10%.
3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence is decided in favour of the appellant herein. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them by the Tribunal. The only issue to be decided is the quantum.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has considered Rs.30,000/- per annum which is unjust even in the year of accident. It is submitted that the income of the deceased is business of supply of books and he was 45 years of age. He was survived 4 dependents. It is submitted that the deduction towards personal expenses also requires to be disturbed and the amount cannot be refused for future prospects of deceased.
5. It is submitted that the deceased being 45 years of age at the time of accident, the multiplier of 5 granted by the Tribunal requires to be enhanced.
6. It is submitted by the Advocate for appellant that none has appeared for the respondents though notices has been sent to the insurance company. The income which has not been granted requires to be enhanced. Learned Advocate pointed out that the additional amount under the head of future prospects has not been added as per the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 Supreme (SC) 1050.
7. After hearing the learned counsels for the appellant and perusing the judgment and order impugned, this Court feels that the income of the deceased should have been Rs.2,500/- per month namely Rs.30,000/- per year to which as the deceased was 45 years of age, 25% of the income requires to be added in view of the decision in Pranay Sethi (Supra) which would come to Rs.30,000 + Rs.7,500 = Rs.37,500/- out of which 1/4th requires to be deducted as personal expenses of the deceased as there were five dependents who were his unmarried sisters, a divorced sister and mother and, hence, the annual datum figure available to the family is Rs.28,125/- rounded up to Rs.28,000/-. As the deceased was in the age bracket of 41-45 years, the applicable multiplier would be 14 in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121. In addition to that Rs.40,000/- is granted towards conventional heads as it is matter of 1999. Hence, the claimants are entitled to a total sum of Rs. 28,000 x 14 + 40,000 = Rs.4,32,000/-.
8. The rate of interest will be 9% and I am unable to accept the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the rate of interest should be 10%. A Division Bench of Lucknow Bench in F.A.F.O. No. 199 of 2017 (National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lavkush and another) decided on 21.3.2017 have interpreted the Rules, which has been followed by this Court time and again, will enure for the benefit of the appellant and, therefore the rate of interest would be 9% as held in catena of decision of this High Court.
9. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The amount be deposited with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till award and 6% thereafter till the amount is deposited. The amount be deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
Order Date :- 26.04.2019 Shubhankar