JUDGMENT
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.
1. This is claimants’ appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, (Udham Singh Nagar, vide award dated 30.9.2004 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 280 of 2003.
2. The claimants, who are unfortunate parents of deceased Ranjeet Kaur, claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 for her death in the motor accident on 8.11.2003, when the tractor bearing registration No. URN 4978, in which she was travelling, was dashed by the bus bearing registration No. UA 04-3353 resulting in the serious injuries to Ranjeet Kaur, who succumbed to those injuries on the spot. The claimants pleaded that their daughter Ranjeet Kaur was aged about 21 years and used to earn Rs. 4,000 per month from tailoring work.
3. The owner and insurer of the bus contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The owner took the plea that the driver of the tractor was negligent and as such, was responsible for the accident. The insurer, on the other hand, pleaded that the bus was being plied in breach of the policy conditions and the driver was not holding a valid driving licence.
4. The claimants examined Kuldeep Singh, PW 1 and Raja Ram, PW 2 in support of their claim, whereas the owner of the bus examined Mohan Chand Tewari, I)W 1.
5. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, held that the claimants’ daughter Ranjeet Kaur died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 8.11.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the vehicles, i.e., tractor and bus; and the insurer of the bus was liable to pay 50 per cent of the compensation assessed by the Tribunal.
6. The Tribunal did not believe the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased and assessed her income at Rs. 15,000 per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs. 15,000 as the personal expenses of the deceased, claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs. 10,000 per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 10,000 with multiplier of ‘8’, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 80,000. The Tribunal further awarded Rs. 2,000 for the funeral expenses and thus the total compensation was assessed at Rs. 82,000. As the liability of the insurer of the bus was to the extent of 50 per cent of the compensation assessed by the Tribunal, the insurer was directed to pay Rs. 41,000 as compensation to the claimants with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition, i.e., 23.12.2003.
7. Mr. B.M. Pingal, the learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing her income at Rs. 15,000 per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of ‘8’; and in awarding the low compensation of Rs. 41,000 only.
8. Mr. D.S. Patni and Mr. Manish Dalakoti, the learned Counsel for National Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 2, on the other hand, supported the award and submitted that as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the Tribunal was left with no other option but to assess her income on the basis of notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.
9. The findings recorded by the Tribunal that claimants’ daughter Ranjeet Kaur died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 8.11.2003; the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the vehicles, i.e., tractor and bus; and the insurer of the bus was liable to pay 50 per cent of the compensation assessed by the Tribunal have, now, attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award.
10. Claimants’ daughter Ranjeet Kaur was aged about 20 years on the date of the accident. True, the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was not of clinching nature and as such, the Tribunal has rightly discarded the same. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 15,000 per annum requires reconsideration, as the notional income of Rs. 15,000 in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was prescribed in the year 1994 and the accident, in the present case, took place in the year 2003. If depreciation in the purchase value of rupee and the steep rise in the cost of living during the period between 1994 and 2003 is taken into consideration, the notional income of Rs. 15,000 prescribed in year 1994 would, in the year 2003, come to Rs. 30,000 per annum. Thus, we propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 30,000 per annum.
11. By deducting 73rd of Rs. 30,000 as the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs. 20,000 per annum.
12. Considering that the claimants are parents of deceased Ranjeet Kaur, the age of deceased Ranjeet Kaur on the date of the accident was 20 years; and the claimants are aged about 45 years and 43 years respectively, the multiplier of ’10’, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Laxman Iyer , would be appropriate in the case.
13. By multiplying the dependency of Rs. 20,000 per annum with the multiplier of ’10’, the compensation works out to Rs. 2,00,000. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs. 5,000 towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000 for loss to estate. Thus, the claimants become entitled to receive Rs. 2,10,000 as compensation for the death of their daughter Ranjeet Kaur in the motor accident.
14. As the liability of the insurer of the bus is to the extent of 50 per cent of the amount of compensation of Rs. 2,10,000 (rupees two lakh and ten thousand) and a sum of Rs. 41,000 has already been deposited by the insurer before Claims Tribunal in satisfaction of the impugned award, the insurer, now, is liable to pay a further sum of Rs. 64,000 (rupees sixty-four thousand) to the claimants.
15. The claimants are further entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation. The accident took place on 8.11.2003 and the claim petition was filed on 23.12.2003. The impugned award was passed by the Tribunal on 30.9.2004 and the amount of compensation is being enhanced today, i.e., 1.11.2006. Taking the above-mentioned relevant factors into account, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of Rs. 64,000 at Rs. 10,000 (rupees ten thousand).
16. For the foregoing reasons, appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation is allowed in part. Compensation of Rs. 41,000 awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,05,000 (rupees one lakh and five thousand) with further quantified amount of interest of Rs. 10,000 (rupees ten thousand only) on the enhanced amount of compensation. National Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 2, is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 64,000 along with the quantified interest of Rs. 10,000 within a period of two months from today before the concerned Claims Tribunal.
17. No order as to costs.
