1 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.775 OF 1996 1 Smt.Sarubai Haribhau Sarode 2 Smt.Sarlabai Ravindra Sarode 3 Kum.Sapna Ravindra Sarode 4 Chi.Swarup Ravindra Sarode 5 Kum.Swati Ravindra Sarode 6 Kum.Sheetal Ravindra Sarode ...Appellants vs. 1 Duryodhan Dashrath Chavan, Deleted 2 Arvind Bhagwan Rajwade 3 New India Insurance Co. Ltd.Pune ...Respondents Mr.M.S.Lagu h/f Mr.R.S.Apte for the Appellants Mr.S.S.Vidyarthi for the 3rd Respondent Mr.P.B.Shah for the 2nd Respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : OCTOBER 4, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. The appellants are the claimants in a claim petition filed claiming compensation on account of death of one Ravindra. The 1st appellant is the mother of the deceased, the 2nd appellant is the widow and 3rd to 6th appellants are the children of the deceased. The allegation is that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the 1st respondent- driver of a truck which was owned by the 2nd respondent and which was insured with the 3rd respondent at the relevant time. The 2nd respondent did not contest the 2 claim petition. The name of the 1st respondent-driver was deleted. The only contest was by the 3rd respondent. The tribunal found that the appellants were entitled to compensation of Rs.2,02,000/-. As liability of the 3rd respondent was held to be limited to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/-, the tribunal held the 3rd respondent was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- inclusive of a sum of Rs.15,000/- being the amount of no fault liability. Rest of the amount of Rs.52,000/- was made payable by the 2nd respondent. The tribunal directed payment of interest at the rate of Rs.6% p.a from the date of application till the date of realisation. 2 Only challenge in the appeal is to the grant of interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that at the relevant time when the claim petition was filed, interest at the rate of 15% or 16% p.a was being granted and in any event, interest at the rate of 6% p.a is extremely on the lower side. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent opposed the appeal by pointing out that the finding is that the deceased was working as a mason and there were hardly any prospects of increase in the income of the deceased. He submitted that no case is made out for enhancement of the interest. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the rate of interest at the rate of 6% p.a is reasonable. 2 I have given careful consideration to the submissions. The claim petition was filed in December 1987 and the notices were issued in January 1988. Issues were framed on 14th July 1993. Perusal of the Roznama shows that after framing of issues, only on two occasions the appellants and their Advocates were absent. It appears that from March 1993 the matter remained pending 3 for conciliation. Perusal of the Roznama shows that the delay in disposal of the claim petition cannot be attributed to the appellants. 3 Claim petition was filed in the year 1987.It was decided in July 1994. Considering the then prevailing rates of interest offered by the banks, interest at the rate of 12% p.a was being regularly granted at the relevant time. However, during the last few years, rates of interest have been considerably reduced. Hence, till the disposal of the claim petition, interest at the rate of 12% p.a deserves to be granted. For further period, till the date on which compensation amount is deposited, interest at the rate of 9% p.a deserves to be granted. 4 Hence, appeal must succeed in part. Hence, I pass the following order: i) Impugned award is modified and it is directed that the 2nd and 3rd respondents shall pay interest at the rate of 12% on the principal amount from the date of filing the claim petition till 18th July 1994. ii) The 2nd and 3rd respondents shall pay interest on the principal amount at the rate of 9% p.a from 19th July 1994 till the date on which the entire princpal amount was deposited or paid by them. iii)Rest of the impugned award is confirmed. Time of three months from today is granted to pay additional amount payable in terms of the modified Judgment and Award. iv)Appeal is partly allowed in above terms with no order as to costs. JUDGE