1. By way of this appeal, the appellants- original opponent No.3 has challenged the judgement and award dated 04.09.2004, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxiliary), Fast Track Court, Suredranagar, in M.A.C.P. No.273 of 1999, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 12.02.1999, while Sonuben, aged about 9 years, was passing on Ahmedabad-Rajkot Highway. At that time one truck bearing registration No.GJ-3-v-7822 came and dashed her. As a result of the said accident, she sustained grievous injuries and due to which he died. Therefore, the parents of the deceased filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No. 273of 1999, before the Tribunal for compensation.
2.1. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the respective parties and after considering the evidence on record decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellants-original opponent No.3.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the tribunal has committed an error not properly appreciating the evidence produced on record. He further submitted that 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, the Tribunal ought to have deducted ½ amount from the dependency instead of 1/3, since the claimants are the parents of the deceased.
4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials produced on record. It appears from the record that the tribunal has committed an error in deducting 1/3 amount from the dependency. In view of the decision of the Apex Court, in the case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr.(Supra) the parents of the deceased are only entitled to 50% amount from the notional income. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to Rs.7,500/- notional income per annum. I also find that the Tribunal has committed an error in adopting multiplier of 16. However, in view of the decision of the Sarla Varma(Supra), multiplier of 17 is just and appropriate. If multiplier of 17 is adopted, the net amount comes to Rs. 1,27,500/-.
5. The claimants are also entitled to Rs.10,000/- under the head of loss of estate, Rs.5000/- under the head of funeral expenses. Thus, in all the claimants are only entitled to Rs.1,42,500/- whereas the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,20,000/-. Therefore, the excess amount of Rs. 77,500/- will be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company with interest and cost, if any, if the same is deposited by the appellant with the tribunal.
6. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. Decree be drawn accordingly. The present appeal is partly allowed.
pawan [K.S.JHAVERI,J.]