1.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant is permitted to delete respondent No. 4 from the cause title of the appeal.
2.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 15.03.2005, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Ahmedabad in M.A.C.P. No. 57 of 2002, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.02,44,500/- to the claimant with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2.0 On 01.02.2002 at about 7.00 a.m., when minor son of respondents No. 1 and 2- original claimants was proceeding on his bicycle on the Commerce Six Road to Samarpan Flats, Char Rasta, opposite Rajhans Society, a Car bearing No. GJ-1-BK-1590 came and hit him as a result of which he died. The respondents No.1 and 2- original claimants who are parents of the deceased have preferred the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal for compensation in sum of Rs. 2, 44, 500/-
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.
3.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence on record. He further contended that computation of the income for the death of a minor child aged about 13 years at Rs. 3, 000/- per month is based on wrong assumption by the learned Tribunal; that the learned Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 36, 000/- per year and deducting 1/3rd from the same and awarding Rs. 2, 40, 000/- and other conventional amounts.
4.0 I have heard learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and perused the materials produced on record. From the record it is clear that the deceased was aged about 13 years at the time of accident and unemployed person. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by considering the annual income of the deceased of Rs. 15, 000/- as notional income prescribed in 2nd schedule of the Act and 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses would come to Rs. 5,000/- per annum as per the ratio laid down in 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.
Thus, the annual income comes to Rs. 10,000/-. If multiplier of 15 is adopted, as per the decision of Sarla Varma and Others (supra), the net income comes to Rs.1,50,000/-. Therefore, the original claimants are entitled to Rs.1,50,000/- towards the head future economic loss.
5.0 The Tribunal has awarded Rs.4500/- under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, which in my opinion is just and proper. The original claimants are entitled to compensation in sum of Rs.1,54,500/- along with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The excess amount of Rs. 90,000/- will be refunded to the appellant-Insurance company, if the same is deposited by the appellant-Insurance company with the Tribunal. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru* Top