Smt. Mandakani and ors Vs. Abhay Singh and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1118731
CourtRajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided OnJan-09-2014
AppellantSmt. Mandakani and ors
RespondentAbhay Singh and ors
Excerpt:
1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur :judgment: s.b.civil misc. appeal no.528/1999 smt. mandakani & ors.versus abhay singh & ors.date of judgment :: 09.01.2014 present hon'ble mr.justice arun bhansali mr.rajvendra sarswat for dr. sachin acharya, for the appellants. mr.u.c.s.singhvi, for the respondent-insurance company. ---- by the court: this appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 03.05.1999 passed by motor accident claims tribunal, rajsamand ('the tribunal').whereby, for the death of one dheeraj murdia, the tribunal has awarded a sum of rs.8,84,000/- as compensation alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing application for compensation ('the application') i.e.05.03.1992. the facts in brief may be noticed thus: the claimants – wife, children and parents of the deceased filed the application, inter alia, with the averments that while travelling from udaipur to ajmer on 29.08.1991 at around 10.45 am, the vehicle in which the deceased alongwith his co-passengers was travelling, met with an accident with a tanker bearing registration no.dgi7608 being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, which 2 resulted in grievous injuries to the said dheeraj murdia to which he ultimately succumbed. the claimants claimed compensation to the tune of rs.79,98,000/-. a reply to the application was filed by the insurance company disputing the averments contained therein and disputing its liability as well. the tribunal framed four issues and came to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by driver of the tankar – abhay singh and the insurance company was liable to make payment of the compensation. while assessing the amount of compensation, the tribunal relying on the statements of aw-4 smt. mandakani, wife of the deceased and aw-5 pratap singh, father of the deceased, came to the conclusion that the deceased was aged about 38 years and based on the income-tax documents filed at exhibit 4 to 14, assessed the loss of income at rs.8,000/- per month; deducted rs.1,600/- for personal expenses + rs.400/- for conveyance expenses; applied multiplier of 12 and awarded a sum of rs.8,64,000/- towards loss of income, rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and rs.5,000/- towards conveyance expenses. it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded is meager, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as the deceased was an engineering graduate and was a bright young businessman involved in several ventures. on account of his untimely death at the age of 36 years.the business as being carried on by him has been 3 severely effected inasmuch as one of the companies were required to be sold out by the claimants and, therefore, the tribunal was not justified in assessing the income at rs.8,000/- per month only. it was further submitted that the deduction of rs.400/- towards conveyance expenses has no basis as admittedly the deceased was working with several companies and, therefore, there was no question of his spending rs.400/- personally for conveyance expenses. submissions were made regarding non-consideration of future prospects and low multiplier as well. reliance was placed on the judgment of hon'ble supreme court in sarla verma & ors.v.delhi transport corporation (2009) 6 scc121and syed basheer ahmed and ors.v.md.jameel and anr. (2009) 2 scc225 in support of the contentions. per contra, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submitted that the award of compensation is just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. the tribunal has thoroughly considered the facts & circumstances and based on the income-tax returns of the deceased, the assessment has been made and as such the same does not call for any interference. i have considered the rival submissions. from the material placed on record, it is apparent that the deceased dheeraj murdia was an engineering graduate and was involved in several businesses and was in fact travelling in connection with his new business of setting-up of a dealership of 4 telco vehicles. from the statement, it is also noticed that father of the deceased pratap singh was aged 65 years at the time of the death of his son dheeraj murdia and the statement made by the claimants that subsequent to the death of the said dheeraj murdia, the claimants were required to sell certain businesses and were required to engage professionals to look after the business has not been controverted. however, the engaging of professionals for running the business cannot be attributing as a direct loss to the claimants as the said payment to the professionals would be business expenses only. from the material available on record including the income-tax returns/assessment orders.the tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at rs.8,000/- per month, which appears to be just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. however, looking to the age of the deceased, the way he was conducting his business and the consistent increase in the income as reflected in the income-tax documents (exhibit – 4 to 14).the claimants are entitled for grant of future prospects in the present case, which is assessed at 50%. further, in view of the law laid down by the hon'ble supreme court in the case of sarla verma (supra).the multiplier adopted by the tribunal even if the age of the deceased is taken at 38 years is also on the lower side which should be 15 and looking to the number of claimants i.e.5 in numbers.the deduction at 1/4 appears to be reasonable. therefore, as compensation for loss of income, the 5 claimants would be entitled to a sum of rs.8,000/- + rs.4,000/- (for future prospects) = rs.12,000/- – rs.3,000/- (1/4 as personal expenses) = rs.9,000/- x12x15= rs.16,20,000/-. the award of compensation under other heads does not call for any interference, specially in view of the information by learned counsel for the parties that appellant no.1 smt. mandakani and appellant no.4 pratap singh have expired during the pendency of the appeal. so far as the award of interest on the enhanced compensation is concerned, in view of the changed circumstances, in place of interest @ 12% per annum awarded by the tribunal from the date of filing application; on the enhanced compensation, the claimants would be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing application i.e.05.03.1992. the enhanced compensation alongwith interest shall be payable as under :- (1) ms.adhishree - 20% (2) varun - 40% (3) smt. suraj murdia - 40% so far as the award of interest on the amount originally awarded by the tribunal is concerned, the same is maintained @ 12% per annum from the date of filing application i.e.05.03.1992. consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. the award passed by the tribunal is modified to the extent that the claimants would be entitled to a compensation of rs.16,40,000/- alongwtih interest @ 12% per annum on rs.8,84,000/- as 6 originally awarded by the tribunal and @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation rs.7,56,000/- from the dated of filing application i.e.05.03.1992 the amount of enhanced compensation alongwith interest shall be paid in terms of the directions contained hereinbefore within a period of three months by the insurance company. no costs. (arun bhansali).j. pks-2
Judgment:

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT

: S.B.CIVIL MISC.

APPEAL NO.528/1999 Smt.

Mandakani & ORS.versus Abhay Singh & ORS.Date of Judgment :: 09.01.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.Rajvendra Sarswat for Dr.

Sachin Acharya, for the appellants.

Mr.U.C.S.Singhvi, for the respondent-Insurance Company.

---- BY THE COURT: This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 03.05.1999 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand ('the Tribunal').whereby, for the death of one Dheeraj Murdia, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.8,84,000/- as compensation alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing application for compensation ('the application') i.e.05.03.1992.

The facts in brief may be noticed thus: The claimants – wife, children and parents of the deceased filed the application, inter alia, with the averments that while travelling from Udaipur to Ajmer on 29.08.1991 at around 10.45 AM, the vehicle in which the deceased alongwith his co-passengers was travelling, met with an accident with a Tanker bearing Registration No.DGI7608 being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, which 2 resulted in grievous injuries to the said Dheeraj Murdia to which he ultimately succumbed.

The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.79,98,000/-.

A reply to the application was filed by the Insurance Company disputing the averments contained therein and disputing its liability as well.

The Tribunal framed four issues and came to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by driver of the Tankar – Abhay Singh and the Insurance Company was liable to make payment of the compensation.

While assessing the amount of compensation, the Tribunal relying on the statements of AW-4 Smt.

Mandakani, wife of the deceased and AW-5 Pratap Singh, father of the deceased, came to the conclusion that the deceased was aged about 38 years and based on the income-tax documents filed at Exhibit 4 to 14, assessed the loss of income at Rs.8,000/- per month; deducted Rs.1,600/- for personal expenses + Rs.400/- for conveyance expenses; applied multiplier of 12 and awarded a sum of Rs.8,64,000/- towards loss of income, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance expenses.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded is meager, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as the deceased was an Engineering Graduate and was a bright young businessman involved in several ventures.

On account of his untimely death at the age of 36 yeaRs.the business as being carried on by him has been 3 severely effected inasmuch as one of the companies were required to be sold out by the claimants and, therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in assessing the income at Rs.8,000/- per month only.

It was further submitted that the deduction of Rs.400/- towards conveyance expenses has no basis as admittedly the deceased was working with several companies and, therefore, there was no question of his spending Rs.400/- personally for conveyance expenses.

Submissions were made regarding non-consideration of future prospects and low multiplier as well.

Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma & Ors.v.Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC121and Syed Basheer Ahmed and Ors.v.Md.Jameel and Anr.

(2009) 2 SCC225 in support of the contentions.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the award of compensation is just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

The Tribunal has thoroughly considered the facts & circumstances and based on the income-tax returns of the deceased, the assessment has been made and as such the same does not call for any interference.

I have considered the rival submissions.

From the material placed on record, it is apparent that the deceased Dheeraj Murdia was an Engineering Graduate and was involved in several businesses and was in fact travelling in connection with his new business of setting-up of a dealership of 4 Telco vehicles.

From the statement, it is also noticed that father of the deceased Pratap Singh was aged 65 years at the time of the death of his son Dheeraj Murdia and the statement made by the claimants that subsequent to the death of the said Dheeraj Murdia, the claimants were required to sell certain businesses and were required to engage professionals to look after the business has not been controverted.

However, the engaging of professionals for running the business cannot be attributing as a direct loss to the claimants as the said payment to the professionals would be business expenses only.

From the material available on record including the income-tax returns/assessment ordeRs.the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month, which appears to be just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

However, looking to the age of the deceased, the way he was conducting his business and the consistent increase in the income as reflected in the income-tax documents (Exhibit – 4 to 14).the claimants are entitled for grant of future prospects in the present case, which is assessed at 50%.

Further, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra).the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal even if the age of the deceased is taken at 38 years is also on the lower side which should be 15 and looking to the number of claimants i.e.5 in numbeRs.the deduction at 1/4 appears to be reasonable.

Therefore, as compensation for loss of income, the 5 claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.8,000/- + Rs.4,000/- (for future prospects) = Rs.12,000/- – Rs.3,000/- (1/4 as personal expenses) = Rs.9,000/- X12X15= Rs.16,20,000/-.

The award of compensation under other heads does not call for any interference, specially in view of the information by learned counsel for the parties that appellant No.1 Smt.

Mandakani and appellant No.4 Pratap Singh have expired during the pendency of the appeal.

So far as the award of interest on the enhanced compensation is concerned, in view of the changed circumstances, in place of interest @ 12% per annum awarded by the Tribunal from the date of filing application; on the enhanced compensation, the claimants would be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing application i.e.05.03.1992.

The enhanced compensation alongwith interest shall be payable as under :- (1) Ms.Adhishree - 20% (2) Varun - 40% (3) Smt.

Suraj Murdia - 40% So far as the award of interest on the amount originally awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the same is maintained @ 12% per annum from the date of filing application i.e.05.03.1992.

Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.

The award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the claimants would be entitled to a compensation of Rs.16,40,000/- alongwtih interest @ 12% per annum on Rs.8,84,000/- as 6 originally awarded by the Tribunal and @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation Rs.7,56,000/- from the dated of filing application i.e.05.03.1992 The amount of enhanced compensation alongwith interest shall be paid in terms of the directions contained hereinbefore within a period of three months by the Insurance Company.

No costs.

(ARUN BHANSALI).J.

PKS-2