Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The DAVIES' method or the multiplier method as it has come to be known is now accepted as an appropriate working method; though, however, in principle, both the methods are essentially directed towards the same end."

This Decision is being uniformly followed by all the Courts in the State.

8. But a Division Bench of this Court in GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.R.T.C, v. KHATUJABEE, , followed the Nance's method for evaluating the compensation to be awarded under the head of 'loss of dependency'. It felt compelled to adopt the said method in contra distinction to the multiplier method adopted in Bhandary's case in view of the Decision of the Supreme Court in JYOTSNA DEY v. STATE OF ASSAM, 1987(1) ACJ 172 and RAJENDRA KUMARI Vs SHANTA TRIVEDI, , and this is what was observed in that Decision in relation to the method adopted in Bhandary's case:

The aspect whether Bhandary's case stood impliedly over-ruled in view of the Decision of the Supreme Court in Rajendra Kumari's case and Jyotsna Dey's case came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court in O.V. SHANTHAKUMARI v. KOKILA, ILR 1990 KAR 4325 and it was held that, Bhandary's case had not been over ruled by implication by the Decisions of Supreme Court in Rajendra Kumari's case and Jyotsna Dey's case and the contrary view taken in Khatujabee's case was over-ruled. Despite this authoritative pronouncement of the Full Bench it was tried to be contended on behalf of the claimants by Sri Balasumbramanyam that even subsequent to this Full Bench Decision, the Supreme Court has followed the Nance's method and nothing has been pointed out by the Supreme Court to say that the multiplier method or Davies method is the correct method to be adopted for evaluating the loss of dependency. Our attention was invited to the Decision of the Supreme Court in HARDEO KAUR AND ORS. v. RAJASTHAN STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANR., wherein the Nance's method has been adopted for evaluating the amount awardable under the head of 'loss of dependency' and therefore it was urged by Sri Balasubramanyam that despite the Full Bench Decision of this Court adverted to already, there is no prohibition to follow the Nance method and it was also urged that the Supreme Court has not held that Davies method or the multiplier method was the only method to be followed in preference to the Nance's method and that practically in all other High Courts in our Country, Nance's method has been followed and life should not become cheaper in Karnataka and we should also fall in line with the other High Courts in awarding just compensation following the Nance's method.

10. In Bhandary's case where the multiplier method or the Davies method has been adopted taking basic multiplier of '20' and the operative multiplier of '16' for a case where the deceased was between 18 and 22 years and it is scaled down by one for every increase of age of the deceased by five years and this has been found to be mathematically precise in arriving at the amount awardable under the head of loss of dependency and also the fact that the amount awarded should also be exhausted by the time the deceased could have reached the last span of his life. It has also been checked with reference to the annuity table and found that the results arrived at are absolutely precise and when the said Decision has received the seal of approval by the Full Bench Decision of this Court and when in the latest Decision of the Supreme Court this method has been called a scientific method and the other method viz., the Nance method has been termed as unscientific and virtually obsolete method, there is no scope for this Court to adopt Nance method to award compensation under the head of 'loss of dependency'.

11. Then we should find out whether the Tribunal was right in assessing the amount of compensation payable under the head of 'loss of dependency' and whether it deserves to be enhanced and if yes by how much?

12. In Davies method me amount or wages the deceased was earning should be taken as the suiting point. The salary certificate-Ex.P1 pertaining to the deceased, shows that he was getting monthly salary of Rs. 689/- in the pay scale of Rs. 300-700. The Tribunal has deducted Rs. 239/- towards personal expenses of the deceased and has taken a sum of Rs. 450/- as loss of dependency. It may be noticed that there were as many as five dependents to the deceased. Having regard to the number of dependents of the deceased, it appears that deduction of Rs. 239/- towards personal expenses of the deceased is on a higher side and on the other hand we should deduct only a sum of Rs. 139/- towards personal expenses and the loss of dependency per month should be taken at Rs. 550/-.