1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 28.01.2005 passed by the Motor accident Claims Tribunal ( Auxi), Surendranagar in M.A. C. Petition No. 465 of 1998 whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed claim petition filed by the claimant by awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 7,80,000/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization.
2.0 On 01.06.1998, Bhavesh Chandulal was passenger in offending luxury bus bearing registration No. GJ131 1550. When it reached near the sim of Village Samia on SurendranagarLimdi Road, it turned turtle. As a result thereof, Bhavesh sustained serious injuries and ultimately succumbed to the same. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed which is challenged in the present appeal.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that learned Tribunal has committed error in assessing the income of Rs. 5000/ in spite of the fact that specific question was put to the claimant whether her husband is paying income tax or not. According to him, since the taxable income in the year 1998 was Rs. 40,000, by considering the annual income of Rs. 30000/ and by applying multiplier of 16, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 480000/. He submitted that by awarding Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium, Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/ towards loss to the estate, the total compensation would come to Rs. 505000/. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the appeal is restricted to Rs. 100000/.
4.0 Learned advocate for the appellant further contended that learned Tribunal erred in granting Rs. 50000/ under the head of conventional amount; that Rs. 30000/ ought to have been awarded under the head of conventional amount and that interest on the compensation amount is on higher side.
5.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the aspects and no interference may be caused.
6.0 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
7.0 As far as income is concerned, it was found that taxable income was Rs. 40000/ in the year 1998. Further, it has been admitted in cross examination of claimant No.1 that she is not having any document to prove the income of her husband and further stated that her husband was not paying any income tax return. Further, the claimant No.1 failed to prove the income. Hence in absence of any documentary evidence regarding the income of the deceased, the income of Rs. 40000/ per year would be just and proper. The Tribunal erred in deducting 1/5th toward personal and living expenses. Looking to the dependents in the family, 1/4th ought to have been deducted towards personal and living expenses in view of the decision in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121. By deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses, the dependency loss of benefit on annual basis would come to Rs. 30000/. The deceased was aged 34 years at the time of accident as per his birth certificate Exh. 32. The multiplier of 15 applied by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It should be 16 in view of the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Verma (supra). By applying multiplier of 16, the future loss of income would come to Rs. 480000/.
8.0 The amount of Rs. 50000/ towards conventional amount and Rs.
10000/ towards funeral expenses are on higher side. However, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 10000/ towards loss to the estate, Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium and Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses.
9.0 In view of the above, the total compensation would come to Rs.505000/( Rs. 480000/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 10000/ towards loss to the estate + Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium + Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 780000/ as compensation. Since, the appeal is restricted to Rs. 100000, the insurance company is liable to pay Rs. 680000/ as total compensation. The excess amount of Rs. 100000/ along with proportionate costs and interest shall be refunded to the appellant insurance company. The award is modified accordingly. The appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*