Patna High Court
Most. Kewala Devi And Ors. vs Bihar State Rajya Transport ... on 26 April, 1988
Equivalent citations: II(1988)ACC608, AIR1988PAT351, AIR 1988 PATNA 351, (1988) BLJ 693
Author: S.B. Sinha
Bench: S.B. Sinha
JUDGMENT S.B. Sinha, J.
1. This appeal under Section 110-D(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act arises out of a judgment and award dated 12-7-85 passed by Sri P.K. Saran, District Judge, Nawadah in Claim Case No. 144/1978./6/84
2. The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass.
3. A bus belonging to the respondent-corporation bearing registration No. BHN 8462 met with an accident in the night between 2-5-78 and 3-5-78. The said bus, according to the findings of the learned Court below itself, was being recklessly and negligently driven by the respondent 4.
4. Admittedly the husband of the appellant 1 and the father of respondents 2 and 3, namely, Sheo Shankar Ram died in the said accident.
5. The appellants claim a sum of Rs. One lac as compensation for death of the said Sheo Shankar Ram. In the aforementioned claim the appellants further claim interest.
6. Before the learned Court below the respondent-Corporation filed a show cause in which the factum of accident was admitted by them but it was submitted that there was no recklessness and negligence on the part of the driver.
7. In view of the pleadings of the parties the learned Court below framed the following issues : --
(1) Is the application maintainable ?
(2) Whether the accident in question was caused due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver V (3) If the claimants are entitled to the claims propounded and if so what would be the quantum of the compensation ? (4) If the applicants were entitled to relief/reliefs prayed ?
8. All the issues were answered in favor r of the appellants.
9. However with regards to the quantum of compensation, the learned Court below held that the deceased who was a ward-attendant in the operation theatre of P.M.C.H. was getting salary of Rs. 292.40 paise per month. Learned Court below, therefore, held that the appellants were entitled only to Rs. 35,040/- and to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of institution of the claim case.
10. While calculating the aforementioned amount the learned Court below adopted multiplier system and followed a decision of this Court in Bihar State Rajya Transport Corpn. v. Chandeshwar Misra, reported in 1983 BBCJ 401 : (AIR 1983 NOC 211).
11. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted that the learned Court below failed to take into consideration the evidence of P.W. 5, the Accountant of the P.M.C.H. in its proper perspective. On 14-12-82 the said Accountant deposed that the deceased would have got a salary of Rs. 581/-. This vital aspect of the matter, it appears, has not at all been considered by the learned Court below.
12. It is now well known that expectancy of life of a human being is increasing day by day. Further an employee of the State of Bihar was bound to get increment from time to time as was indicated by P.W. 5 himself. The deceased further would have been entitled to further promotion and other rise in pay, allowances and other emoluments and further might have been given other benefits in this regard.
13. Although the multiplier system is one of the systems which can be taken recourse to for the purpose of computing the amount of compensation, in my opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the case particularly in view of the fact that at the time till his death, the deceased was aged about 30 years, the compensation shall be calculated on the basis of expectancy of life.
14. Taking all facts into consideration it is assumed that with effect from 14-12-1982 he would have been getting Rs. 581/- per month and even further it may be assumed 1 hat be would have been spending half of the said amount upon himself.
15. If the compensation is calculated on the basis of expectancy of life, in such a circumstance it comes to about Rs. 90,0007-up to the date of his super annuation. Besides the same the appellant would have naturally been entitled to the amount of gratuity of Rs. 9,000/-, the leave encashment benefit as also the other benefits including pensionary benefit. Reference in this connection may be made to Manjurahi v. B.L. Gupta, reported in AIR 1977 SC 1158.
16. Taking into consideration that the appellants are getting a lump sum amount and further taking into consideration that at the time of his death the appellants had been getting a salary of Rs. 292.40 paise per month, in my opinion, a sum of Rs. 85,0007- should be paid to the appellants by way of compensation.
17. It may be held that normally nowadays the interest at the rate of Rs. 12% per annum is awarded.
18. In such a situation the appeal is allowed in part and the judgment and award passed by the learned Court below is modified to the extent that the appellants shall be entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 85.000/- by way of compensation besides the interest at the rate of Rs. 12% per annum from the date of the institution of the claim case.
19. As there is no appearance on behalf of the respondents, there will be no order as to costs.