1. Being aggrieved by the award of compensation of Rs.15,00,600/- in M.C.O.P.No.4898 of 1999 for the death of S.B. Sakthivel, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
2. The respondents, who are the wife and daughters of S.B. Sakthivel, who died in a motor accident filed a petition in MCOP No.4898 of 1999 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai (II Judge, Small Causes Court), Chennai. against the Manging Director, Metroplitan Transport Corporation (hereinafter called Corporation), claiming a compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
On 1.9.99 when the deceased was riding the Bajaj M-80 TN-09-F-6722 on Velachery main Road from south to north, the MTC Bus No.TN-01-N-1849 came rashly and negligently on the said road from opposite direction and hit against the Bajaj M-80 and thereby caused multiple injuries to the deceased and later he succumbed to injuries. Regarding the accident, a criminal case has been registed in Cr.No.477/S2/99 with Guindy Police Station. The deceased was running a wine shop. Alleging that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, belonging to Transport Corporation, claimants filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. In the claim petition, the mother of the deceased was later impleaded as 4th respondent,
4. The Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/-. Observing that the deceased would have spent Rs.33,333/-towards personal expenses and also observing that the balance of Rs.66,667 would have been spent towards business expenses and payment of salary to the employees, the Tribunal has taken Rs.10,800/- per month towards loss of contribution to the family. The Tribunal has calculated loss of income as Rs.14,25,600/- (Rs.10,800 x 12 x 11); for future prospects Rs.40,000/- and for loss of consortium Rs.20,000/- for funeral expenses Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and thus awarded total compensation Rs.15,00,600/-.
5. Challenging the quantum of compensation, the learned counsel for the Transport Corporation Mr.A. Babu submitted that the Tribunal erred in taking the monthly contribution of the deceased as Rs.10,800/- and the same is without any basis. The learned counsel would further submit that the Tribunal has taken monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant also submits that insofar as the amount awarded under the heads "future prospects" Rs.40,000/- and " pain and suffering" Rs.5,000/- are not sustainable.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants. The learned counsel for the respondents/claimants submits that the deceased was running a wine shop and he was having huge turn over as seen from Ex.P.11 invoices and submits that the Tribunal has rightly taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/-
7. The manner of accident and negligence fastened upon the driver of the Corporation bus is not seriously disputed. Only the quantum of compensation is under challenge. ExP.6 is the wine shop licence; Ex.P.7 is the confirmation order for awarding licence to run the wine shop during the year 1998. and Ex.P.8 is the Form VII licence issued to the deceased Sakthivel for running the retail vending liquor and the same is valid from 1.6.95 to 1.6.98.
8. P.W.1, the wife of the deceased, in her evidence has stated that her husband was getting monthly income of Rs.1,00,000/- from the wine shop, but the same has not been substantiated by any evidence. Even though there is no evidence to show that the deceased was getting Rs.1,00,000/-, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/- per month without any rational mode of calculatiion. Absolutely there is no basis for taking monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/-p.m. The Tribunal proceeded on the presumptive footing that the deceased had furture prospects of developing business in the wine shop. While so, assuming the future prospects, the Tribunal gone astray in saying that the people are addicted to liquor and therefore, the deceased would have much prospects in running wine business. In our considered view, the Tribunal erred in taking the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,00,000/- and the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very much on the higher side. If really the deceased was getting monthly income of Rs.1,00,000/-, the deceased would have been an income tax assessee. No income tax return was filed by the claimants to substantiate the income of the deceased. The claimants have also not produced the profit and loss account of the "Brindha Wines", which the deceased was running. In the absence of any evidence, the finding of the Tribunal that the deceased was getting monthly income of Rs.1,00,000/- cannot be sustained.
9. The Tribunal has fixed the monthly contribution of the deceased to the family as Rs.10,800/- which appears to be very much on the higher side. From Ex.P.7, it is seen that confirmation of sale privilege for running the wine shop was granted and highest amount of Rs.9,09,000/-. Having regard to the highest privilege amount for which the wine shop was taken, we are of the view that the monthly income of the deceased could be taken as Rs.10,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3 for personal expenses i.e., Rs.3,333/-, the monthly contribution to the family is calculated at Rs.6666/-, rounded to Rs.6,750/-.
10. Ex.P.9 is the passport, in which, the date of birth of the deceased is stated as 3.3.1949, as per which, at the time of accident, the deceased was 51 years. As per II Schedule the proper multiplier to be adopted is "11", which the Tribunal has correctly adopted.
11. Loss of Contribution/loss of dependency to the family is calculated at Rs.8,91,000/- (6,750 x 12 x 11). In a fatal case, there can be no award, of compensation under separate head of "loss of future life of claimants". Therefore, the compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head "loss of future life of the claimants" cannot be maintained.
12. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- for funeral expenses and the same are maintained. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- for pain and suffering to the deceased and same is maintained as the deceased died later in the hospital.
13. The Tribunal has not awarded to the claimants 2 and 3, who are the daughters, any compensation towards loss of love and affection, for which, we award Rs.15,000/-to each and thus totalling Rs.30,000/-.
14. The total compensation awarded to the claimants is reduced to Rs.9,56,000/- which is calculated as under:
1. (6,750 x 12 x 11) .... 8,91,000.00
2. Love and affection .... 30,000.00
(Rs.15,000/-each of claimants 2 and 3)
3.Pain and suffering .... 5,000.00
4. Funeral expenses .... 10,000.00
5. Loss of Consortium .... 20,000.00
___________
Total 9,56,000.00
___________
15. The Tribunal has granted interest at the rate of 9% and the same is maintained. Reduced compensation is to be apportioned amongst the claimants and the 4th respondent, who is the mother of the deceased in the same ratio as ordered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- to the 4th respondent who is now said to have passed away. The compensation amount of Rs.1,00,000/- is payable to the 4th respondent is ordered to be paid to the 1st claimant/wife of the deceased.
16. In the result, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.9,56,000/- payable with interest at the rate of 9%p.a and the civil miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is closed.
17. The appellant Transport Corproation has already deposited 50% of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal along with proportionate accrued interest and the claimants are stated to have withdrawn their respective share of compensation. The appellant Transport Corproation is directed to deposit the balance of the reduced compensation along with accrued interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the compensation amount payable to them. The 1st claimant is permitted to withdraw the compensation amount of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded to the mother of the deceased along with accrued interst.