Judgment:
ORDER
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.
1. This is claimants' appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (henceforth 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 25th April, 2005 passed in Claim Case No. 169/2004.
2. The claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased-Komal Singh claimed compensation of Rs. 21,50,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act') for his death in the motor accident on 13-1-2004 when his vehicle was dashed by the offending vehicle-truck bearing registration No. CG 05 ZC 0193 resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot. The claimants further pleaded that the deceased-Komal Singh used to earn Rs. 4,000/- per month by working as Manager in Maa Karma Borewells.
3. The owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle-truck contested the claim and denied their liability to pay the compensation to the claimants. The owner and driver pleaded that the drive of the truck was not responsible for the accident and the liability to pay compensation to the claimants, if any, would be of the Insurance Company, as the vehicle was insured on the date of the accident. The insurer on the other hand pleaded that the truck was being plied in breach of the policy conditions and the driver of the truck was not holding a valid driving licence.
4. The claimants examined Bhisham Kumar (A.W. 1), Premlata (A. W. 2) and Nammulal (A.W. 3), in support of their claim, whereas the owner, driver and insurer of the truck did not examine any witness in rebuttal.
5. The Tribunal on the evidence led before it held that deceased-Komal Singh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13-1-2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle-truck; as the offending vehicle-truck was insured on the date of the accident with New India Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company, was liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.
6. As the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was found by the Tribunal unworthy of credence, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased-Komal Singh at Rs. 15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Act. By deducting 1/3 of Rs. 15,000/-towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs. 10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 10,000/- with the multiplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,70,000/- By awarding further sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased-Komal Singh in the motor accident on 13-1-2004.
7. Smt. Indira Tripathi, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- only.
8. Shri N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate for respondent No. 3-New India Insurance Company on the other hand supported the award and contended that the Tribunal has been quite liberal in awarding substantial compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- to the claimants.
9. As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased-Komal Singh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13-1-2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle-truck; and the insurer ol' the offending vehicle was liable to pay the compensation to the claimants; have now attained finality. That apart, these findings are not under challenge before us in this appeal. We, therefore, affirm the findings recorded by the Tribunal in that behalf.
10. Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
11. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Court/Tribunal should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation nor a bonanza.
12. The claimants pleaded that deceased-Komal Singh used to earn Rs. 4,000/- per month by working as Manager in Maa Karma Bore Wells. Nammulal (A.W. 3) in his evidence before the Tribunal stated that a sum of Rs. 3,500/- was paid as salary to deceased-Komal Singh. He further slated that in addition to the above salary, allowance of Rs. 50/- per day was being paid to him on the days of his field duty. As against this evidence, Premlata (A.W. 2) stated that her husband used to get sum of Rs. 4,000/- as salary every month.
13. In view of the above discrepant evidence about the income of the deceased, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased.
14. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 15,000/- per annum on the basis of notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Act requires re-consideration as the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- was prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 and the accident in the present case wherein Komal Singh lost his life took place in the year 2004. If the increase in the prices of the essential commodities and the cost of living during the period between 1994 to 2004 is taken into consideration, the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- prescribed in the year 1994 would come to Rs. 36,000/- in the year 2004. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 36,000/- per annum.
15. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs. 36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs. 24,000/- per annum.
16. As the deceased was 35 years of age on the date of the accident, the appropriate multiplier in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited v. Kalpana (Smt.) and Ors. reported in : AIR2007SC1243 would be 13.
17. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 24,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs. 3,12,000/-. By adding a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow; loss of estate; and funeral expenses, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs. 3,22,000/- as compensation for the death of Komal Singh in the motor accident on 13-1-2004.
18. The claimants are further entitled to get interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 1,47,000/- from the date of filing of the claim petition (13-2-2004) till the date of actual payment of the enhanced amount of compensation.
19. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 3,22,000/-.The claimants are awarded interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 1,47,000/- from the date of filing of he claim petition (13-2-2004) till the date of actual payment of the enhanced amount of compensation.
20. Respondent No. 3-The New India Insurance Company Ltd., is granted three months' time for depositing the enhanced amount of compensation with interest due thereon before the concerning Claims Tribunal.
No order as to costs.