Sathikumari, aged 45, W/O. deceased V.G. Lakshmanan, South Nambiar Madom Moozhikulam, Chengamand and Ajith Kumar, S/O. Sathikumari and Anil Kumar, S/O. Sathikumari and Akhila, D/O. Sathikumari and Saradha Nangayaramma, M/O. deceased V.G. Lakshmanan V. New India Assurance Co. Ltd

MACA/1648/2009

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the claimants, Sathikumari and her children, against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's decision, which awarded compensation for the death of V.G. Lakshmanan due to a motor accident caused by a vehicle insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. The Tribunal had found negligence on the part of the vehicle's driver and awarded compensation under various heads. The appellants were dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, particularly the calculation for loss of dependency, which they argued was too low and not in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation. The insurance company contested the appellants' claims regarding the calculation of future prospects and the application of the multiplier.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 805902 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-04-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2010 (2) KLT 802 (SC))
• Laws Referred To: Motor Vehicles Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VIJU THOMAS; M MEENA JOHN
• Assessee Lawyers: V K PILLAI; GOPAKUMAR
• Keywords: Compensation; Future prospects; Income tax deduction; Loss of dependency; Motor Accident; Multiplier; Negligent driving
• Section: 166

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/21ST CHAITHRA 1935 MACA.No. 1648 of 2009 ( ) -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OPMV.1415/2004 of M.A.C.T.,PERUMBAVOOR. APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER IN O.P.(MV).1415/04: -------------------------------------------- 1. SATHIKUMARI, AGED 45, W/O.DECEASED V.G.LAKSHMANAN, SOUTH NAMBIAR MADOM MOOZHIKULAM, CHENGAMAND. 2. AJITH KUAMR, S/O.SATHIKUMARI, -DO-(MINOR)- REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SATHIKUMARI. 3. ANIL KUMAR, S/O.SATHIKUMARI, -DO- (MINOR) -DO- 4. AKHILA, /DO.SATHIKUMARI, -DO- (MINOR) -DO- 5. SARADHA NANGAYARAMMA, M/O.DECEASED V.G.LAKSHMANAN, -DO- BY ADVS.SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA) RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT NO.3 IN OP.(MV) 1415/04: ------------------------------------------ NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.NO.339, IST FLOOR, NEAR 111 B CROSS SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESWARAM BANGLORE-560003. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU THOMAS BY ADV. SMT.M.MEENA JOHN THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN & BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No. 1648 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of April, 2013 JUDGMENT Siri Jagan, J. The claimants in O.P.(MV) No.1415 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, have filed this appeal, dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of Lekshmanan who died in a motor accident caused by the negligent driving of a vehicle insured with the respondent. The Tribunal, after finding negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, assessed compensation under various heads as follows: Loss of dependency : Rs. 11,52,000/- Transportation expenses : Rs. 5,000/- Pain and suffering : Rs. 5,000/- Loss of love and affection : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of consortium : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of estate : Rs. 2,500/- Funeral expenses : Rs. 3,000/- ------------------------- Total: Rs, 11, 97,500/- =========== 2 [MACA.1648/09] According to appellants, the assessment of compensation for loss of dependency is too low. It is submitted that at the time of death the deceased was 48 years sold and was a Clerk in the Federal Bank drawing a total salary of Rs.11942/-. The salary of Clerks in Federal Bank was subsequently enhanced to Rs.18,000/- per month. Even otherwise, as per the decision of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2010 (2) KLT 802 (SC), in the case of salaried persons, who are aged between 40 to 50, 30% has to be added for future prospects while calculating compensation payable under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which has not been done by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has merely adopted Rs.12000/- per month as his salary. It is further submitted that as per the decision in Sarla Verma (supra), the multiplier to be adopted for a person aged 48 years is 13, whereas the Tribunal has adopted only 12. A still further contention is that there were five dependants, despite which the Tribunal deducted 1/3rd whereas as per Sarla Verma's case (supra) only 1/4th could have been deducted. 2. The counsel for the insurance company disputes the 3 [MACA.1648/09] contentions of the appellants. It is submitted that the deceased was past 48 and, therefore, the entire 30% could not have been added for future prospects and the 30% has to be ratably distributed depending on the age between 40 and 50. It is further submitted that the Income Tax payable has to be deducted from the amount ,which also the Tribunal has not done. 3. We have considered the rival contentions in detail. It is proved that the monthly salary of the deceased at the time of death was Rs. 11942/-. Sarla Verma's case certainly stipulates that for the age group between 40 to 50, 30% has to be added for future prospects. The question of deduction of Income Tax arises only when depending on the income, the deceased was actually liable to pay Income Tax. Of course, the counsel for the appellant submitted that at the relevant time the ceiling limit for paying Income Tax was Rs.50,000/- per year. But that contention does not take into account the fact that for savings like Provident Fund, L.I.C. etc. a person would be entitled to deduction from Income Tax as well. These days there are hardly any person who could take advantage of such exemptions in the matter of reducing tax liability. As per Sarla Verma's case, the multiplier 4 [MACA.1648/09] for a person aged 48 years is 13 and, since there are 5 dependants, the deduction for personal expenses of the deceased is only 1/4th. Calculated thus, the appellants are entitled to compensation for loss of dependency of Rs. 17,55,000/- (Rs.15,000x12x13x3/4) instead of Rs.11, 52,000/-. Therefore, for loss of dependency, the appellants should be entitled to Rs,6,03,000/- more. This amount would carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of payment. The respondent insurance company is directed to deposit that amount also within three months. The appeal is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. sd/- BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. krs. // True Copy // P.S. to Judge. "