1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 16.08.2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, M.A.C.T ( Aux.), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 413 of 2003 wherein the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the aforesaid claim petition by awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 543000/ ( Rs. 408000/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 125000/ towards conventional amount + Rs. 10000/ towards funeral expenses) along with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of claim petition till its realization.
2.0 On 20.03.2003, Rameshbhai Nanjibhai Parmar was proceeding on his Hero Honda motor cycle bearing registration No. GJ3AD2161 towards Mesvada from Faddant in moderate speed on correct side of the road. At that time, truck No. GTO3470 came in a rash and negligent manner from Kuvadva and dashed against the motor cycle from wrong side resulting into death of Rameshbhai. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 600000/ before the Tribunal wherein the Tribunal has passed the aforesaid award which is challenged in the present appeal by the appellant.
3.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in considering the income of Rs.3000/ per month in absence of any documentary evidence on record in that regard; that in absence of the documentary evidence on record with regard to the income of the deceased, the learned Tribunal ought to have assessed the income of Rs.1500/ per month. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal committed error in deducting 1/6th towards personal expenses; that the learned Tribunal has committed in awarding Rs. 125000/ towards conventional amount for nonpecuniary loss and that amount of Rs. 10000/ towards funeral expenses is on higher side.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.
5.0 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
7.0 As far as income is concerned, from the evidence on record, it appears that the same is on higher side. Bytaking into consideration the notional income on the basis of 10% increase from the year 1994, the same can be taken at Rs. 27000/ per annum. The Tribunal has committed error in deducting 1/6th towards personal and living expenses. 1/5th ought to have been deducted towards personal and living expenses since the number of dependent family members exceed six in view of the ratio laid down in case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121. By deducting 1/5th towards personal and living expenses, the dependency loss would come to Rs. 21600/ per year. The learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 17 which is just and proper. By applying multiplier of 17 years the future loss of income would come to Rs. 367200/ ( Rs. 21600/ x 17). The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 40800/ towards future loss of income which is on higher side.
8.0 Further, the claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10000/ under the head of loss of estate, Rs. 5000/ towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/ for loss of consortium in view of the principles laid down in case of Sarla Verma ( supra).
9.0 In the premises aforesaid, the total compensation would come to Rs. 392200/ ( Rs. 367200/ towards future loss of income + Rs. 10,000/ loss to the estate + Rs. 5000 towards funeral expenses + Rs. 10000/ towards loss of consortium). There is 20% negligence on the part of the deceased. Therefore, 20% is required to be deducted. 20% of Rs. 392200/ would come to Rs.78440/ and by deducting the same the total compensation would come to Rs. 313760/. Thus, it is held that the appellantinsurance company is liable to pay Rs. 313760/ as total compensation to the claimants. However, the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.543000/. Therefore, an excess amount of Rs. 229240/ ( Rs. 543000/ Rs.313760/) shall be refunded to the appellant along with proportionate costs and interest. The award of the learned Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed with no order as to costs. The amount, if any, lying with this Court shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*