NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. ARTHANARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the finding of the Claims Tribunal, holding that the Appellant -Insurance Company as jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, after having found that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the drivers of the vehicles namely, Tempo bearing registration No.TN -39 -F -5695 and Vinayaka Bus bearing registration No.TN -34 -H -4488, apportioned the negligence equally, in the ratio of 50:50 and awarded compensation of Rs.4,68,000/ - with interest @ 7.5% per annum, New India Assurance Company Limited, Tiruchengodu, has preferred this Appeal.

(2.) ASSAILING the correctness of the award, Mr. C. Ramesh Babu, learned Counsel for the Appellant -Insurance Company submitted that the deceased was a bachelor. Even assuming without admitting for argument sake that the Tribunal has not committed any error in determining the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/ -, for the purpose of computing dependency compensation, following a decision of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma & others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 (SC), the Tribunal ought to have deducted 50% of the monthly income towards the Personal and Living Expenses of the deceased. It is his further submission that having regard to the age of the mother of the deceased i.e., 45 years, mentioned in the Claim Petition, the Tribunal ought to have applied '14 ' multiplier for the purpose of computing loss of contribution to the family. According to him, if the abovesaid method is adopted, the Respondents/Claimants would be entitled to compensation of Rs.2,52,000/ - only and therefore, prayed for reduction. The Appellant -Insurance Company has also challenged the finding of the Claims Tribunal fixing negligence in the ratio 50:50, on account o head -on collision between the abovesaid vehicles.

(3.) PERUSAL of the judgment in C.M.A. No.2072 of 2010 dated 17.8.2010 shows that the finding regarding negligence has been sustained. In such a view of the matter, liability should be proportionate to the extent of negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicles. When equal responsibility has been fixed on the drivers for the cause of the accident, the Tribunal ought not to have directe3d all the Respondents before the Claims Tribunal to pay the compensation equally and jointly or individually to the Claimants and such finding cannot be countenanced, for the reason that under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the Insurer, owner or driver of the vehicle, involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be, only to the extent of percentage of negligence caused by the driver of the vehicle insured with the Insurance Company. In the case on hand, admittedly both the drivers have been found responsible for the accident and consequently, both the Insurance Companies are liable to pay compensation to the extent of negligence found against the drivers of the vehicles involved in the accident. Therefore, the portion of the judgment, holding the Appellant -Insurance Company equally and jointly and severally, liable to pay the entire compensation to the Respondents/Claimants, is modified to the extent that the owner of the Vinayaka Bus bearing registration No.TN -34 -H -4488, and its Insurer namely, New India Assurance Company Ltd., Tiruchengodu, the Appellant herein, are jointly and severally liable to pay 50% of the compensation to the Respondents/Claimants with proportionate accrued interest and the owner of the Tempo bearing registration No.TN -39 -F -5695 and its Insurer -United India Insurance Company Limited, Salem, are jointly and severally liable to pay remaining 50% of the compensation amount with proportionate accrued interest to the legal representatives.