Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Shree Lal And Ors. vs Surya Kant And Ors. on 6 April, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2006ACJ925, RLW2005(3)RAJ1657, 2005(3)WLC707
Author: S.K. Keshote
Bench: S.K. Keshote
JUDGMENT Keshote, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the miscellaneous appeal.
2. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed by the claimant appellants against the award, dated 1.6.2001, of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hindaun City, in Claim Case No. 38/1999. Under the impugned award the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 74,000/- as compensation in favour of the claimant appellants for the death of Master Arun Kumar in the motor vehicle accident took place on 4.2.1999.
3. Master Arun Kumar was the student of Class 1. He was aged 7 years. In the case of death of a child of the age of 8 years, this Court in S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 36/2000 awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation in favour of the claimants.
4. The learned counsel for the claimant appellants, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Manju Devi and Anr. v. Musafir Paswan and Anr. {2005 (1) T.A.C. 609 (S.C.)}, submitted that in the case of death of a child the amount of compensation is to be awarded after taking his income at Rs. 15000/- per annum, as per the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, treating him as non-earning member. In his submission the multiplier of 15 ought to have been adopted by the learned Tribunal as per the Second Schedule to the Act aforesaid.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the non-claimant respondents supported the award of the learned Tribunal.
6. Having given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties I find sufficient merit and substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the claimant appellants.
7. Second Schedule to the Act aforesaid provides that for assessment of compensation the multiplier of 15 should be taken in the case of death of a boy upto the age of 15 years.
8. In Manju Devi's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not make any deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased boy was aged 13 years and the multiplier of 15 has been adopted.
9. In the result the appeal succeeds in part. The impugned award of the learned Tribunal is modified and it is declared that the claimant appellants are entitled for the amount of compensation under the head of loss of economic dependency taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 15000/- per annum and the multiplier of 15 shall be applicable.
10. In this way, the amount of compensation under the head of loss of economic dependency comes to Rs. 2,25,000/- (15000x15) and after deducting therefrom the amount of Rs. 42,000/- of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal under this head, the actual enhanced amount to be paid to be claimant appellants comes to Rs. 1,83,000/- (2,25,000-42,000). On this amount the claimant appellants shall be entitled for interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
11. The non-claimant respondent No. 2, the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur, is directed to deposit the amount of enhanced compensation with interest thereon, as directed above, in this Court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, by way of Account Payee Cheque/DD/Pay Order, drawn in the name of Registrar (Administration) of the Court.
12. On deposit of the amount aforesaid by the non-claimant respondent No. 2 RSRTC, the court shall pass the order of its investment/disbursement and the registry to place the matter for orders on Board immediately after the amount is deposited as per aforesaid directions.