1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 830 OF 1997 Kamla Thakurdas Shamdasani & Anr. . ............................ Appellants vs Pramod Baskar Phulavre & Anr. ................................ Respondents .. Mr. Vinod N. Tayade for Appellants Mr. N.D. Shetty for Respondent No.1 .. CORAM: A.S.OKA, J DATE: 19th November, 2009 JUDGMENT: 1 Heard learned counsel appearing for the Appellants. The Appellants are claimants in a claim petition filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as’ the said Act’). 2 One Rajesh died in an accident on 23rd July, 1991. On a motor cycle driven by one Deepak, he was a pillion driver. The Truck owned by the first respondent gave a dash to the motor cycle. The said Rajesh died on the spot. 2 The first appellant is the mother of deceased Rajesh and the second appellant is the brother of deceased Rajesh. The second respondent is the insurer of the said Truck. The appellants by filing the claim petition claimed compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-. By the impugned judgment and award, compensation of Rs. 84,000/- including no fault liability has been awarded with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum. 3 The learned counsel appearing for the appellants pointed out that the age of the deceased on the date of accident was about 22 years. He pointed out that the learned Member of the Tribunal has committed an error by applying multiplier of only 8. He submitted multiplier applied is certainly on the lower side. He pointed out that in addition to the compensation granted by the Tribunal, the appellants are claiming enhancement by additional amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-. None appears for the respondents. 4 I have carefully considered the submissions. There is no challenge to the impugned award by the respondents by preferring an appeal and/or cross objections. The date of birth of the deceased has as reflected from birth certificate is 7th May, 1969. Thus, on the day of the accident, the age of deceased Rajesh was 22 years. The second appellant in his deposition has stated that the deceased was working as a Junior Clerk with J.J. Hospital, Byculla and was drawing salary of Rs.1,750/- per month. Salary certificate 3 has been placed on record. As noted by the learned Member of the Tribunal, the respondents have not challenged that the deceased was employed and was drawing salary of Rs.1,750/- per month. 5 As far as computation of compensation is concerned, the case will be governed by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarala Varma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009 (6) Supreme Court Cases 121). As stated earlier, the age of the deceased was 22 years. He was employed as a Junior Clerk with the J.J.Hospital which has been taken as an undisputed fact by the Member of the Tribunal. As held in the case of Sarala Varma (supra) addition of 50% of the actual salary will have to be made on account account of future prospects of increase in earnings. Therefore, for calculating the multiplicand, the income of deceased will have to be taken at Rs. 2,625/-. As held in the said decision and in particular in paragraph 31 thereof a deduction of 50% will have to be made on account of personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, the multiplicand will be of a sum of Rs. 1,300/-. As held by paragraph 31 of the said decision, the second appellant cannot be considered as a dependent as he was having independent earnings. As far as multiplier is concerned, in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, multiplier of 13 will have to be adopted considering the age of the first appellant. By calculating the compensation as per the formula 4 laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, the same will certainly exceed claim amount of Rs.2,00,000/- made by the appellant. The dependency of the first appellant will have to taken at Rs.15,600/- per year and multiplier of 13 will have to be applied. What is granted by the Tribunal is only a sum of Rs. 84,000/-. The claim for enhancement of compensation in appeal is of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, which will have to be granted as entitlement of the appellant is to a higher amount. As far as further interest on enhanced amount is concerned, the same will have to be fixed at the rate of 7.5% per annum. It will have to be clarified that the enhanced compensation will entirely go to the first appellant who is the mother of the deceased. 6 Hence, I pass following order: i) In addition to the compensation awarded under the impugned award, the respondents are jointly and severally directed to pay additional compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the first appellant together with interest on the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- at the rate of 7.50% per annum from 26th August, 1991 (date of filing of the claim petition) till the date of actual deposit with the Tribunal. ii) The respondents are ordered to pay proportionate costs of the appeal to the first appellant. 5 iii) Time of four months is granted to second respondent to deposit additional compensation with the Tribunal. iv) After the amount is deposited, the learned Member of the Tribunal will pass the appropriate order regarding investment of the amount or disbursement of the amount in favour of the first appellant. v) Appeal is allowed in above terms. Judge.