9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ti Swift Car. Due to that accident, Ritesh Bhanu Shali and one Sardar Jaspreet died on the spot and another Shivam received injuries. The 1st Appellant-Amrit Bhanu Shali is the father, the 2nd Appellant-Smt. Sarlaben is the mother and 3rd Appellant-Mamta Bhanu Shali is the sister of the deceased. Claiming to be the dependent on the deceased they filed Motor Accident Claim Case No. 80/2008 before the Tribunal Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') for award of compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,50,000/-. 5. The non-applicants, owner of the car, driver and National Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Insurance Company") appeared and defended their case. On the pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed the following issues: SL. No. ISSUE 1. Whether on 20.07.2001 at about 4.30 P.M. near Village Thanod more, the non applicant No. 1 had hit the Swift Car by driving rashly and negligently the vehicle Scorpio bearing No. CG 04 HA/5372 under the ownership of non applicant No. 2 and insured with the non applicant No. 3 due to which Ritesh Bhanushali died after receiving the injuries ? 2. Whether applicants have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gligent driving by the driver of the Scorpio Car. 9. While dealing with issue No. 2, the Tribunal adverted to the statement made by the Appellant No. 1 in his cross examination and held that the Appellant No. 3 Mamta Bhanu Shali cannot be treated as dependant upon the deceased because she was aged about 29 years and was married by that time. The rest of the Appellant Nos. 1 and 2, the parents, were accepted as dependents. The Tribunal taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was unmarried and 26 years old young man at the time of accident and his salary was Rs. 99,000/- per annum, deducted 50% of the income and applying the multiplier of 17 as per the decision of this Court in "Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation" (2009) 6 SCC 121 held that the Appellants are entitled to get compensation of Rs. 8,66,000/-. Rest of the issues were decided in favour of the Appellants. 10. The Appellants challenged the award of the Tribunal by filing Miscellaneous Appeal (C) No. 765 of 2010 before the Chhattisgarh High Court for enhancement of compensation. The National Insurance Company also challenged the same award by filing Miscellaneous Appeal (C) No. 515 of 2010 be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther submitted that the High Court committed serious error by applying multiplier of 13 which was against the law laid down by this Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra). 13. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents-Insurance Company submitted that the deceased-Ritesh Bhanu Shali was unmarried boy aged about 26 years and the High Court rightly applied the multiplier of 13 as per the age of the claimants, i.e. parents. According to the Respondents, the multiplier is to be applied as per the age of the deceased or as per the age of the claimant, whichever is higher but aforesaid submission cannot be accepted in view of the finding of this Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra). 14. We have considered the respective arguments and perused the record. The questions which arise for consideration are: (i) What should be the deduction for the 'personal and living expenses of the deceased- Ritesh Bhanu Shali to decide the question of the contribution of the dependent members of the family; and (ii) What is the proper selection of multiplier for deciding the claim. 15. The question relating to deduction for 'personal and living expenses' and selection o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses may be restricted to one-third and contribution to the family will be taken as two-third. (ii) Re Question - Selection of multiplier 42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in Column (4) of the table above (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years, M-1 for 61 to 65 years and M- 5 for 66 to 70 years. 16. Admittedly both the parents, 1st Appellant- Amrit Bhanu Shali (father) and 2nd Appellant- Smt. Sarlaben (mother) have been held to be dependents of deceased- Ritesh Bhanu Shali and, therefore, the Tribunal held that the 1st Appellant and 2nd Appellant have the right to get the compensation. On the date of the accident the 3rd Appellant- Mamta was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
