Appellants challenged the compensation awarded for a motor accident death. The single judge allowed the appeal in part, directing an enhancement of Rs.42,000 based on a revised multiplier and allowance for estate and funeral expenses, with interest.
Compensation enhanced by Rs.42,000 to a total of Rs.2,02,000 with 6% interest from date of petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2221 OF 2006
DATE: 15.02.2012
Between: P.Damoder and others .. Appellant And Syed Mustaq Hussain and another
.. Respondents
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2221 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
Heard D.L.Pandu, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri Naresh Byrapaneni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.
2. This appeal is filed by the claimants against the order dated 10.11.2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Mahaboobnagar in O.P.No.206 of 1998 seeking enhancement of compensation.
3. According to the petitioners, the deceased D.Ravinder and Ravi Prakash while going on scooter, a lorry bearing No. AP 12 T 5619 driven in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and hit their scooter on 14.10.1997, due to which, the deceased D.Ravinder and the pillion rider Ravi Prakash died on account of the injuries sustained by them.
4. The deceased Ravi Prakash was unmarried and he was said to be working as lab technician. Ex.A.18 was filed showing that the deceased worked as lab technician from December, 1996 to October, 1997. Learned Tribunal rightly considered the income of the deceased
at Rs.2,000/- per month taking into consideration the fact that the oral assertion made by the claimants that he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month may not be entirely correct.
5. The monthly income of the deceased was Rs.2,000/- and his annual income comes to Rs.2,000/- x 12 = Rs.24,000/-. From this, half of the amount has to be deducted towards his personal and living expenditure which comes to Rs.12,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs.12,000/- can be taken as contribution to the family. Learned Tribunal wrongly applied the multiplier ‘13’ instead of the multiplier ‘16’ which is relevant to the age of the mother of the deceased (35 years). The relevant multiplier as per the judgment of SARALA VARMA AND OTHERS v DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND
ANOTHER[1] is ‘16’. If the above said amount is capitalized with multiplier ’16, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.12,000/- x 16 = Rs.1,92,000/-. This apart, the appellants/claimants are entitled for an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate and further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all, the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.2,02,000/-. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,60,000/-. Therefore, the enhancement would be Rs.2,02,000/- minus Rs.1,60,000/- = Rs.42,000/-. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
5. With the above enhancement in the compensation amount, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________ Date: 15.02.2012 R. KANTHA RAO, J kvrm
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2221 OF 2006
DATED: 15.02.2012
[1] 2009 ACJ 1298
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal should be enhanced based on a higher multiplier and additional expenses.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
SARALA VARMA AND OTHERS v DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHERReferred¶14
SARALA VARMA AND OTHERS v DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER
P.Damoder and others
Syed Mustaq Hussain
another
R. KANTHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
