A- ^ -/\- A@De!Iams Appiicants Non-applicants Misc. .Appea! No.324 of ^ 4 Smt L Kantamma; aged about 45 years, Wd/o' Late Shri Kuberu LPC Prakash, aged about 24 years, S/o Late Kuberu 3 L. Bhaskar Rao, a.qee , s/o Lal s, aged about 1 s/o Late Kuberu Al! r/o 12-C/Street - 10/ Sect< PO Bhiiai, Distt Durg, CG 1. Shobhit Das Manikpuri, Near Potato Godown, Titurdih, Durg, PO & Distt u 2 Mana.qer, Bhilal Conductor, Ganga Complex, Supeia, PO Distt. Dura CG Shllai, National insurance Co. Ltd., through iranch Manager, Divisional Office, PO Supeia (Bhilai) Distt. Durg CG Smt Jogamma, Vv'd/o Ramsingh, aged 65 years, r/o 12-C/Street-l O Sector-4, PO Bhiiai, Distt Durg CG ;TION 173 OF THE MOT< L UIF,- • L"ArfrT '3a^~t- Ki'ai^^aW t^E ;»-»;. : '''!„ r,?fel.-.-»-£. g >hri Amrito Das, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1,2 and 4 though >hri Shreekumar Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shi Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. •£at^na^n^- WSW.V J 3 The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Raieev Gu.Dta, C.J. This is claimants' appeai for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Third Ada'itiona! Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, t)ura (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 14.09.2002, passed in Claim Case No.52/2002. 2) As against the compensation 6f Rs.32,26,460/- claimed by the appellants/ claimsnts, unfortunate widow, sons and mother of deceased Kuberu, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 31.12.1999, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation aiong with interest @ 9% per annum In t'ne event of insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensatlon withln two months ofthe passing ofthe award. 3) The Tribunai on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence ied before it heid that deceased Kuberu died on account of the injuries sustained by "him in the motor accident on 31.12.1999; the deceased scooterlst and the driver of the other ve'nicle Maruti Esteem Car bearina reaistration No.MP-24G/5961 contributed to In' fa' the accldent; the extent of contribution to the accident of the '"'•!'. '« % •"!Si s .•'.'?' "^-; scooterlst and the driver of Maruti Esteem Car was 15% and 85%; as the above Maruti Esteem Car on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, t,he Snsurance Company vvas liable to pay 85% of the compensation assessed bv the Tribunal. 4) The Tribuna! assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.7,186/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.7,186/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimant's dependency was assessed at Rs.4,790/- per month and Rs.57,480,''- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.57,480/- wlth the multiD'ier of 8 and the notiona! annual dependencv based on th.e pension of the deceased wlth the muitiplier of 5, the compensation was worked out to Rs.6,03,540/-. Bv addina further su.m of ;s.2,000/- jiwiai /-. ?/ ses and KS.O,UUU/- ror loss OT consortium to the widow, the totai compensation was worked out to Rs.6,10,540/-. By deducting 15% of the above amount on account of the contributory negiigence of the deceased scooterist and 10% of the above amount on account of iump-sum payment to the daimants, ihe Tribuna! assessed the total compensation of Rs.4,57,905./-, which was rounded off to Rs.4,50,000/-. The Tribunai, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Kuberu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- @ 9% per annum in th° event of insurer's failure to deposit the ^.% <;.il •-%? ^ amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the av/ard. 5) Shri Amrito Das, iearned counsel for the appeiiants submitted that th.e Tribuna! has erred in splittina the multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunai and multlplying the annuai dependency of Rs.57.480/- with the multiDlier of 8 and 50% of Rs.57,480/- i.e. with the multiplier of 5; in deducting 10% of the compensation assessed on account of lump-sum payment to the clalmants; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- oniy. 6) Shri ShreekumarAgrawai, learned Senior Counsel v/ith'S'nri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the National insurance Company Limited, on the other hand; supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- awarded by the Tribuna! is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7) Before examining as to whether the compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- awarded by the Tribuna! is just and prooer compensation in the fac-ts and circumstances of the present case, we would like to refer to the recent dictum of the Apex Court: in the ca.se of Raj Rani ars« .imiiea ana otn in 120091 13 SCC 654. wherein the Apex Court' while deprecatina the practice of deduction on accour.t of lump-sum payment of compensation, made foilowinc observations in para 22 : "22. The practice of deduction for iump sum payments from the amount "Sfe-^-.%. '3. awarded in motor accldent cases by the Tribunai has been disapproved by this Court in several other decisions. (See Hardeo Kaw V. Rajasthan STC - (1992) 2 SCC 567, Renu Baia Kalita V. Dhlren Chakravarty - (1998) 8 SCC 363 and Urmilla Pandey V.Khalll Ahmad - (1994) 4 SCC 207). Thus, the High Court as wei! as the Tribunal have erred in deductlna a further 1/3 from the amount of compensation on the reasoning of payment of lump sum amount." 8) Considering the evldence available on record about the manner ofthe accident: time ofthe accident: and width ofthe road, v/e are 'satisfied that the Tribuna! has rightly held that the deceased scooterist also contributed to the accident.to the extent of 15%. We, therefore, afflrm the findina recorded bv the Tribuna! that the deceased scooterist contributed to the accident to the extent of 15% and the driver of the other vehicle Maruti Esteem Car to the extentof85%- 9) Considering the basic pay and dearness aiiowance mentioned in the certificate about the income of the decease.d (Ex.P/13) produced by the ciaimants before the Tribungl, we are satisfied t'nat the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of ths deceased at Rs.7,186/-permonth. 10) The daimants' dependency also has been rightiy assessed 'oy the Tribuna! at Rs.4,790/- per month and Rs.57,480/- per annum by deducting the usuai 1/3 of th.e income of ths deceased towards h.is personal expenses. '1-, r.^ 11) Nevertheless, the Tribunal has fallen into error in splitting the multiplier on th.e basis of the remainina tenure of the deceased. We, therefore, propbse to re-assess tne compensation by appiyins the appropriate multipiier in the case. 12) Considering the age of the deceased; his widov'.'; their sons and mother ofthe deceased; and-the fact that fhe two ofthree sons who were claimants before the Tribunai were major, we are of the opinion that muttip'ier of 12 would be appropriate in the present case. 13) By muJtiplying the annuai dependency of Rs.57,480/- with the muitiplier of 12 the compsnsation works out to Rs.6,89,760/-. The claimants are further entltled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for ioss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for !oss of consortium to the widow. The total compensation, thus, works out to Rs.7,04,760/-. By deducting 15% of the above amount of Rs.7,04,760/- on account of the contributory negligence of deceased Kuberu, who was driving the scooter, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.5,99,046/- as compensation for the death of deceased Kuberu in the motor accident. 14) Learned counsel for the partles submitted that with a view to avoid any possibie dispute between the parties about the period for vv'hlch the ciaimants are entitled to receive Interest on the enhanced amount of comDensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation maybe quantlfied in this appeal itself. '^ subbu 15) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, includini the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeai and the Tact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,49,046/- at Rs.14.954/-. 16) For the foregoing reasons, the appeai filed by the appe'lants' dalmants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.5,99,046./- w'th further quantified amount ofi.nt.erest of Rs.14,954/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,49,046/-. 17) Respondent No.3 the Nationa! Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the tota! sum of Rs.1,64,000/- (Rs.1,49,046/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.14,954/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enh.anced amount of compensation of Rs.1,49,046,/-) beforc the concerning Ciaims Tribunal. No order as to costs. sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge