1 FA.833.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.833 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5679 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.833 OF 2010 New India Assurance Co.Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Smt.Sugandha Vilas Dhavle & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2912 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.833 OF 2010 Smt.Sugandha Vilas Dhavle & Ors. ...Applicants Versus New India Assurance Co.Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Indrajeet R.Kulkarni for Appellant. Mr.Vilas B.Tapkir for Respondents 1 to 4. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED:- JULY 23, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. Admit. Mr.Vilas B.Tapkir waives notice for Respondents 1 to 4, who are the contesting Respondents. 2 FA.833.10.sxw 2. As short question is involved, Appeal is take up for final disposal forthwith by consent. 3. This Appeal takes exception to the Judgment and Decree passed by the Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Pune dated 2nd January 2007 in M.A.C.P. 549 of 2002. The said proceedings arose out of the claim filed by the contesting Respondents 1 to 4 consequent to accidental death of husband of Respondent No.1. The vehicle TATA Tempo bearing No.MH-14/V-1062 which was coming from Pune side in opposite direction collided with the motorcycle Hero Honda bearing No.MH-12/AB-8171 which was driven by the deceased husband of the Respondent No.1. That incident took place on 14th December 2001. As a result, the contesting Respondents instituted Petition for compensation up to Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs). 4. The Trial Court on the basis of the pleadings and evidence on record answered the material issues in favour of the Claimants. It has held that it is proved that on 14th December 2001 at about 3.20 p.m. incident took place between above numbered motorcycle and TATA Tempo at Pune-Satara Road, near Khed Shivapur, Taluka Haveli, District Pune. It has further held that the Claimants have proved that accident occurred because of the rash 3 FA.833.10.sxw and negligent driving by the driver of the said TATA Tempo. Further, in the said accident, the husband of Respondent No.1 sustained injuries and succumbed to the said injuries. After recording these findings, the Trial Court proceeded to consider the question regarding the quantum of compensation. That issue has been discussed, amongst others, in Paragraph 18 of the impugned Judgment. It has found as of fact that the deceased was hardly 32 years of age and earning Rs.5,543/- (net salary) + Rs.3,943/- (recovery of loan amount installment) + Rs.3,000/- (future earning/future prospects employment of the deceased) = Rs.12,486/-. The Trial Court thus assumed the annual income of the deceased at Rs.1,49,832/- and after deducting 1/3rd amount, arrived at the amount of Rs.99,888/- which would remain in the hands of the victim to distribute the same to his dependents i.e. the Applicants before the Court. After arriving at the said amount, the Trial Court applied the multiplier of 17 and arrived at the total consideration of Rs.16,98,096/-. After providing for funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of estate, the aggregate amount has been determined at Rs.17,08,096/-. On the basis of the said finding the Trial Court proceeded to pass the following order : 4 FA.833.10.sxw “O R D E R Petition is partly allowed with proportionate costs as under. (2) Opponent No.2 and 3 do pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs. 17,08,096/-, together with simple interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation of the amount, within thirty days to the date of this order, to the applicants under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. (3) Compensation as ordered herein above, shall be inclusive of claim under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. (4) The applicants No.2, 3 and 4 shall be entitled to claim and receive only Rs.75,000/- each as their share, out of the total compensation amount payable to the applicants and applicant No.1 is entitled to receive remaining amount of compensation deposited by the opponents along with interest. The applicant No.2 to 4 are not entitled to claim and receive interest on the said amount of compensation. (5) On deposit of amount of compensation, the amount that came to the share of applicant No.1 – Smt.Sugandha Vilas Dhavale No.2- Smt.Saraswati Yashwant Dhavale, No.3-Kumari Vishakha Yashwant Dhavale and No.4-Smt.Vijaya Tanaji Shelke, is to be made over to them by account payee cheques. (6) Claim application is hereby dismissed against opponent No.1 with costs. (7) Final award be drawn up accordingly. Pronounced in open court.” The above decision is subject matter of challenge in the present Appeal. 5. After having considered the submissions and examining the material on record, we have no hesitation in upholding the finding of fact recorded by the Trial Court on the material issue that it has been sufficiently proved that the accident took place on 14th December 2001 at about 3.20 p.m. 5 FA.833.10.sxw involving the Hero Honda Motorcycle and TATA Tempo on Pune Satara Road, near Khed Shivapur, Taluka Haveli, District Pune. The said accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the TATA Tempo in which the husband of the Respondent No.1 suffered serious injuries and succumbed to the said injuries. Even Counsel appearing for the Appellant was unable to point out any infirmity in the finding so recorded by the Trial Court. 6. In the circumstances, the next question that needs to be addressed is about quantum arrived at by the Trial Court. Insofar as this issue is concerned, once again, we have no hesitation in upholding the opinion of the Trial Court that the age of the deceased was only 32 years on the date of accident. Further, his earning was around Rs.5,543/- (net salary) at the relevant time. Besides, the net salary, he was paying EMI towards loan account in the sum of Rs.3,943/-. These figures are substantiated by the documents on record including the latest pay slip of the deceased. The Trial Court has then provided for sum of Rs.3,000/- per month towards future earning/future prospects of the employment of the deceased. By now, it is well established that if a person is in service, the Court may have to reckon the future earning/future prospects of the deceased. In our opinion, the 6 FA.833.10.sxw amount assumed by the Trial Court towards future earning/future prospects of the employment of the deceased in the sum of Rs.3,000/- cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable. In the circumstances, even this finding of the Trial Court deserves to be accepted. 7. Counsel for the Appellant had also argued that the rate of interest provided by the Trial Court is excessive. We do not find any merits in this submission. As the Trial Court has provided interest only at the rate of 8% per annum, which in our opinion is fair and reasonable. 8. Having said this, the only issue that needs to be addressed is: whether the Trial Court has applied the correct multiplier of 17. Insofar as this question is concerned, it is no more res integra. The recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt.Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. Reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 has analysed the legal position and has restated that multiplier as referred to in column 4 of the Chart given in Paragraph 19 of the reported Judgment is the correct multiplier to be applied. In the event, the deceased is in the age group of 31 to 35 years, as per the said Chart, the multiplier to be applied would be 16. Thus understood, the multiplier applied by the Trial Court of 17 in the fact 7 FA.833.10.sxw situation of the present case is inappropriate. 9. The Appeal would succeed only to this limited extent. In other words, the Trial Court Judgment will have to be modified by providing for multiplier of 16 instead of 17 and the compensation amount will have to be recomputed on that basis. In other words, the compensation payable to the Claimants would be Rs.99,888/- x 16 = Rs.15,98,208/-. In addition to the said amount, the compensation provided by the Trial Court towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of estate will have to be retained as it is. In that case, the total amount payable to the contesting Respondents would be in the sum of Rs.15,98,208/- + Rs.2000/- + Rs.5000/- + Rs.3000/- = Rs.16,08,208/-. The final amount specified in Clause 2 of the impugned order will stand modified to Rs.16,08,208/- instead of Rs.17,08,096/-. Rest of the order shall remain as it is. 10. The Appeal partly succeeds to the above extent with no order as to costs. Decree be drawn accordingly. 11. In view of the above order, Civil Applications also stand disposed of. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)