1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 03.05.2005, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kachchh at Bhuj, in M.A.C.P. No. 391 of 2004, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.02,04,500/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2.0 On 30.05.2004, when minor son, viz., Prakash alias Munno was walking on the road, the luxury bus bearing registration No. GJ-12-T-4442 driven by respondent No.3, owned by respondent No.4 and insured with the appellant-original opponent No.3- Insurance Company, came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the minor son as a result of which, he died. The respondents No.1 and 2- parents of the deceased have preferred the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal for compensation in the sum of Rs. 2, 04, 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 submitted that the deceased was aged only 8 years at the time of the accident and hence he was liable to be classified in the category of non-earning persons in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that in case of unmarried persons, the deduction towards personal expenses are required to be 2/3rd and not 1/3rd.
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 8 years at the time of accident. Therefore, annual income of the deceased is considered at Rs.15,000/-. If 15,000/- is taken as annual income, 1/3rd amount is required to be deducted towards her personal expenses, as per the ratio laid down in the 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 future loss of income.
5.0 The Tribunal has awarded Rs.4500/- under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, which is in my opinion is just and proper. Therefore it is held that the claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,54,500/-. The excess amount 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