Ram Bai Vs. Santosh Kumar Pandey and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
motor vehicles - enhancement of - compensation - deceased died due to accident taken place because of rash and negligent driving of another vehicle - claimant, legal representatives, of deceased filed claim petition for grant of compensation - compensation granted - being not satisfied with quantum of compensation, claimants filed present petition - held, tribunal not counted monthly income of deceased in accordance with statement of claimant - multiplier of 17 applicable because of deceased age group was 20 to 25 years at time of accident - hence, compensation amount increase in respect to multiplier and monthly income - petition allowed to said extent only - - we are not happy with the way in which the tribunal has acted upon unreasonably in denying the just compensation to the claimant. when we consider the evidence of ram bai pal, cw 1, the widow of the deceased, she has clearly stated that her husband used to do the work of labour and agriculture and used to earn a sum of rs. from the work of agriculture as well as that of labour.arun mishra and k.s. chauhan, jj. 1. this appeal has been preferred by claimant for enhancement of compensation. the claims tribunal on account of death of husband of the appellant has awarded compensation of rs. 50,000 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation.2. the claimant ram bai filed a claim petition on account of death of her husband ram prasad. he was going on cycle to village rajnagar, from the opposite side a motor cycle no. mp 16-b 5986 driven by santosh kumar pandey in a rash and negligent manner came and dashed the cycle, due to that ram prasad sustained injuries on various parts of body. report of accident was lodged at p.s. khajuraho. ram prasad was taken to the hospital at rajnagar from where he was referred to chhatarpur as condition did not improve. thereafter, he was referred to gwalior where he was treated for 2 days in neuron surgery hospital, gwalior before he succumbed to injuries. police has registered the offence against driver. compensation of rs. 7,23,700 was claimed. it was submitted that deceased used to earn a sum of rs. 4,000 p.m.3. the parents of the deceased were added as non-applicant nos. 2 and 3 as they were residing separately. vehicle was owned by arvind singh yadav and insured with new india assurance co. ltd.4. the driver in the reply has denied the factum of accident. the parents of the deceased submitted that they were living with the deceased, they used to be looked after by their son as such they were also entitled for compensation.5. the owner of the motor cycle contended that his vehicle was not involved in the accident. vehicle driven by respondent no. 1 was not his vehicle. as his vehicle was insured, the liability if any, was to be borne by the insurer.6. the insurer in the reply, inter alia, contended that excessive compensation was claimed. the vehicle insured was not involved in the accident as such insurer denied its liability to make the payment of compensation.7. the tribunal held that accident was caused by santosh kumar pandey while driving motor cycle no. mp 16-b 5986. ram prasad sustained injuries and he succumbed to the injuries during the course of his treatment at gwalior. the income has been assessed at rs. 30 per day and total compensation of rs. 50,000 has been awarded inclusive of rs. 30,720 awarded for loss of dependency and rs. 10,000 for medical expenditure/conveyance. dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation the widow has come up in this appeal.8. we have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. we are shocked by the approach of the claims tribunal while assessing the income of the deceased at rs. 30 per day and the total amount of rs. 30,720 has been awarded on account of loss of dependency. the apathy of the tribunal is writ large. we are not happy with the way in which the tribunal has acted upon unreasonably in denying the just compensation to the claimant. it was claimed in the claim petition that deceased used to earn a sum of rs. 4,000 p.m. when we consider the evidence of ram bai pal, cw 1, the widow of the deceased, she has clearly stated that her husband used to do the work of labour and agriculture and used to earn a sum of rs. 4,000 p.m., that she has stated in para 5 of her deposition. her in-laws were having sufficient agricultural land. in cross-examination in para 9 she has further asserted that her husband used to do the work of agriculture and used to earn a sum of rs. 4,000 p.m. the parents were not giving the share in the land to them as such they were residing separately. her husband used to do the work of labour also and payment of rs. 20 to rs. 30 used to be paid to the labour work was available for 7-8 days. the tribunal has taken the income at rs. 30 for 7 to 8 days only. from the work of agriculture, income of the deceased has not been assessed. income has been assessed on lower side then as prescribed even for non-earning member in second schedule to motor vehicles act, 1988, however, at the same time, we find statement of claimant that deceased was earning a sum of rs. 4,000 p.m., appears to be exaggerated version, he must have been earning a sum of rs. 2,500 p.m. from the work of agriculture as well as that of labour. thus, the annual income comes to rs. 30,000, after making conventional v3rd deduction, loss of annual dependency comes to rs. 20,000. age of the deceased was mentioned in post-mortem report as 18 years but wife has stated his age to be 20 years. when accident took place, the deceased must have been in the age group of 20-25 years, thus multiplier of 17 is applicable, same is applied. thus compensation on account of loss of dependency comes to rs. 20,000 x 17 = rs. 3,40,000. in addition claimant is entitled for further sum of rs. 30,000 for funeral expenses, loss to estate, loss of expectancy of life inclusive of a sum of rs. 7,500 awarded to the widow on account of loss of consortium and we affirm award of rs. 10,000 for medical expenditure/conveyance as the deceased was treated at chhatarpur and thereafter at gwalior. thus, total compensation comes to rs. 3,80,000 (rupees three lakh eighty thousand). we award 75 per cent compensation to the widow and 25 per cent to the parents as they were at the advanced stage and were residing separately and deceased has left behind the young widow. the compensation enhanced by this court to carry the interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realisation.accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part to the aforesaid extent. parties to bear their own costs as incurred of these appeals.