1. By way of this appeal, the present appellants-original claimants have challenged the judgement and award dated 09.04.2003, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Valsad, in M.A.C.P. No.334 of 1992[old No.576 of 1992], whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.2,14,000/- to the claimants alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of application till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that in an vehicular accident, one Jitendrakumar Mohanlal Shah, expired and therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for compensation. The learned tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after recording the evidence decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellants.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the tribunal has committed an error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.1500/- per month. He further contended that the multiplier of 16 adopted by the is on lower, it should be 17. He further contended that the Tribunal ought to have deducted ¼ amount from the income of the deceased, instead of 1/3, as the claimants are four in number. Therefore, he prayed to allow this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned judgement and award of the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.1500/- without any documentary evidence. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss this appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record as well as the judgement and award of the tribunal. I find that the Tribunal has committed an error in deducting 1/3 amount from the income of the deceased. 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, the tribunal ought to have deducted 1/4 amount, as the claimants are four in number. Even if, Rs.1500/- is taken as monthly income of the deceased. After deducting ¼ amount, the monthly dependency comes to Rs.1125/- and accordingly annually it comes to Rs. 13,500/-. I also find that the multiplier of 16 adopted by the Tribunal is on lower side. In view of 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, it should be 17. If multiplier of 17 is adopted, the amount under the head of dependency comes to Rs.2,29,500/-. Over and above, the claimants are also entitled to Rs.10,000/- under the head of future loss of income, Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.5000/- under the head of funeral expenses.
6. Thus, in all the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.2,54,500/- whereas the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,14,000/-. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for additional amount of Rs.40,500/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of application i.e. 21st December, 1992 till its realization.
7. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The decree be drawn accordingly. present appeal is partly allowed.
[K.S.JHAVERI,J.] pawan Top