Sumathy . vs Babu

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6609-6610 OF 2022

Sumathy and Others …Appellants

Versus

Babu and Another …Respondents

JUDGMENT

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment

and order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the High Court of Kerala at

Ernakulam in MACA No. 1376 of 2006 and order dated 22.06.2016

passed in RP No. 461 of 2016 in MACA No. 1376 of 2006, the original

claimants have preferred the present appeals.

Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SNEHA Date: 2022.09.19 17:06:43 IST Reason: 2

2. In a vehicular accident which occurred on 22.01.2002, the

husband of the first appellant died. At the relevant time, he was working

as mason and aged 48/52 years. The appellants – original claimants –

widow and other dependent children filed a claim petition before the

Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Preumbavoor (hereinafter referred to as

the ‘Tribunal’). The Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,05,000/- under

different heads along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of

filing the claim petition. While determining the compensation, the

Tribunal considered the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,800/- per

month and thereafter after deducting 1/3 rd towards personal expenditure

and applying the relevant multiplier awarded the amount of

compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs. 1,87,200/-.

2.1 In an appeal before the High Court, by the impugned judgment and

order, the High Court has awarded the compensation towards loss of

dependency at Rs. 2,97,000/- considering the income of the deceased at

Rs. 3,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3 rd towards the personal

expenditure of the deceased. Thus, the High Court has enhanced the

amount of compensation to Rs. 3,92,000/- under different heads along

with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.

2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment

and order/s passed by the High Court in awarding the future economic 3

loss – loss of dependency at Rs. 2,97,000/- considering the income of

the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month, the original claimants have

preferred the present appeals.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length

and assuming that the income of the deceased at the relevant time is

considered at Rs. 3,000/- per month, in that case also, while awarding

loss of dependency, future prospects and rise in income ought to have

been considered. We are of the opinion that in the facts and

circumstances of the case, if 25% of Rs. 3,000/- per month is considered

towards future prospects and rise in income and thereafter loss of

dependency is determined, it can be said to be just compensation. Thus,

the claimants shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs. 4,25,000/- under

different heads along with interest @ 9% per annum as awarded by the

High Court from the date of filing the claim petition till its realization.

4. In view of the above and for the reasons state above, the present

appeals are partly allowed. The impugned judgment and order/s passed

by the High Court is/are modified to the extent enhancing the amount of

compensation to Rs. 4,25,000/- under different heads from Rs.

3,92,000/- awarded by the High Court, along with interest @ 9% per

annum from the date of filing the claim petition till its realization. Now,

respondent No. 2 – Insurance Company is directed to pay/deposit the 4

balance enhanced amount of compensation along with interest as above

with the Tribunal, within a period of eight weeks from today and on such

deposit, the same be paid to appellant No.1 – widow of the deceased by

an account payee cheque. The present appeals are partly allowed to

the aforesaid extent. However, in the facts and circumstances of the

case, there shall be no order as to costs.

……………………………………J. [M.R. SHAH]

NEW DELHI; ……………………………………J. SEPTEMBER 19, 2022. [KRISHNA MURARI]