SHANTI PRASAD JAIN Vs. ASHA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on account of the accidental death of their son, who died in a road accident on 17th March, 1983. There is no dispute between the parties that the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver and that the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The only point urged by the appellant is that the Tribunal has completely erred in assessing the loss of dependency to the family of the deceased at 25% of the income of the deceased and the Tribunal has also erred in not awarding any amount towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium. The award has also been challenged on the ground that no interest has been awarded from the date of filing of the petition till the date of award.

(2.) The Tribunal had assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,000/- p.m. The deceased was unmarried at the time of his death and the appellants are his parents. The deceased was 18 years of age at the time of his death and the Tribunal after observing that the deceased would have got married after 5/6 years has assessed the loss of dependency at 25% of his income. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that there was no reason for the Tribunal to assess the dependency at 25% of the income of the deceased as the Tribunal has only assumed that the deceased would have got married after 5/6 years. It is submitted that even assuming that the deceased would have got married at the age of about 28 years, the parents of the deceased would have been entitled to 80% of the income of the deceased till such time he got married as the Tribunal has assessed that the deceased would be spending 20% of his income towards his own expenses. It is submitted that there was thus no reason for the Tribunal to assess the loss of dependency at 25% of the income of the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that as per the IInd schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, the parents of the deceased were also entitled to funeral expenses as well as loss of consortium and even as per the Tribunal's own findings the appellants had closed their evidence in September 1987 after the petition was filed in August, 1983 and this was not such a delay which would dis-entitle the appellants to interest on the amount awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) I am in agreement with learned counsel for the appellants. The Tribunal has not given any reason as to why the appellants are entitled only to 25% of the loss of dependency. The deceased at the time of his death was only 18 years of age and even assuming that he would have been married after about 7/8 years, as per the Tribunal's own findings the parents till that time are entitled to 80% of the income of the deceased. In my view, therefore, the average loss of dependency in any case could not be less than 50% of the income of the deceased. I, therefore, assess the loss of dependency at Rs.500/- p.m. which comes to Rs.6,000/- per year. Applying the multiplier of 16, as has been applied by the Tribunal, the total amount would come to Rs.96,000/-. I also award a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the appellants towards loss of consortium and another sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. The appellants, in my opinion, would also be entitled to interest at least from the date they closed their evidence i.e. September, 1987.