Partly allowed

Smt Tarabai Vithal Salunke and Ors. v. Shri Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Dec 2009FA/1396/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court adjusted the compensation awarded to the appellants for the death of a fishing labourer in a 1989 motor accident. The court increased the award to Rs. 71,400/-, directions interest to be paid at 7.5% p.a., and ordered the appeal to be partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay additional Rs. 31,400/- with interest at 7.5% p.a.; time of four months granted for compliance.

Smt Tarabai Vithal Salunke and Ors. Vs Shri Ramesh… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

mst

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.1396 OF 1996

¶5

Smt.Tarabai Vithal Salunke,

¶6

Dattatraya Vithal Salunke, 3. Smt.Sunanda Vithal Salunke (Mrs.Sunita Raju Pawar) 4. Ravindra Vithal Salunke, All r/o.Rajgurunagar, Dist. Pune. Appellants

¶7

versus

¶8

R.R.Shinde (driver),

¶9

State of Mahaarashtra (owner),

¶10

Deputy Engineer (Mech), P.W.Sub Division Respondents

¶11

Mr.K.V.Saste, advocate for appellants. Mrs.S.V.Sanawaye, AGP for respondents 1 and 2.

¶12

CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.

¶13

DATE : 07th December 2009

¶14

JUDGEMENT :-

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The appellants are claimants in a claim petition filed before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming compensation on account of death of one Vitthal in a motor accident on 29th April 1989. The first appellant is the widow of the deceased and second to fourth appellants are the children of the deceased. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.40,000/- with interest thereon @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition. There is no appeal or cross objection filed by the respondents and, therefore, only issue to be decided is as regards quantum of

¶16

¶17

compensation. The appellants had claimed compensation of Rs.75,000/in the claim petition.

¶18

The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the income taken into consideration by the learned Member of the Tribunal for computing the multiplicand is on the lower side. He submitted that even the monthly dependency taken by the Tribunal is on the lower side. He submitted that the multiplier of 15 ought to have been applied but the Tribunal has chosen to take multiplier of 10. He has placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt.Sarla Verka and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another [(2009)6-SCC-121]. None appears for the respondents.

¶19

I have given careful consideration to the submissions. The case of the appellants was that the deceased was doing fishing and was also doing labour work. The accident is of the year 1989. Therefore, the income of the deceased taken @ Rs.500/- per month is reasonable and proper. As the deceased was not having any permanent employment, no further addition can be made to the said income for the purposes of calculating the multiplicand. The first, third and fourth appellants were the dependents and therefore, one third amount will have to be deducted from the sum of Rs.500/- on account of personal expenditure of the deceased. Thus, the dependency will have to be calculated @ Rs.330/- per month. The yearly dependency comes to Rs.3,960/-. The age of the deceased was 37 years. Therefore, in terms of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Smt.Sarla Varma (supra), the multiplier of 15 will have to be taken. Thus, the compensation amount comes to Rs.56,400/-. To that usual amount of Rs.15,000/- will have to be added. Thus, the total compensation payable comes to Rs.71,400/-. The additional compensation to which the appellants are entitled to is Rs.31,400/-.

¶20

At this stage learned AGP appears. I have heard learned AGP on merits. As indicated earlier, the multiplicand and the multiplier will have to

¶21

¶22

be calculated as per the judgement of the Apex Court in case of Smt.Sarla Verma (supra).

¶23

As far as the interest on the enhanced amount is concerned, the same will have to be fixed @ 7.5% p.a., considering the fact that the rates of interest of nationalized banks have considerably gone down in the recent past.

¶24

Hence, I pass following order :-

¶25

(A) In addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the respondents shall pay to the appellants a sum of Rs.31,400/- with interest thereon @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of institution of the claim petition till deposit of the said amount with the Tribunal;

¶26

(B) The appellants will be entitled to proportionate costs of the appeal from the respondents;

¶27

¶28

(D) Time of four months is granted to the respondents to comply with this judgement;

¶29

(E) Record and proceedings, if any, be returned to the Tribunal.

¶30

(A.S.OKA, J.)

Smt Tarabai Vithal Salunke and Ors. v. Shri Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Tarabai Vithal Salunke and Ors. v. Shri Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Babu Narayan Desai Vs Shri Suleman Yusuf Dukha and Anr.

Shri Prithviraj Sahebrao Jachak Vs Smt. Vimal Dnyandeo Borwake and Others

Khalil Yakub Mujawar Vs 1. Smt. Sonabai Jyotiram Kalke and Ors.

Sarabjeet Singh Vs Air India Ltd. and Ors.

Tukaram Mallu Malme Vs Sudhir Shivappa Pujari and Others

Tukaram Mallu Malme Vs Sudhir Shivappa Pujari and Others