Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, M.JAGANADHA RAO
Chairman, A.P.S.R.T.C., Hyderabad - Appellant
Versus
Shafiya Khatoon - Respondent
C.M.A. No. 74/79
Decided On : 08-24-84
Advocates Appeared :
.
Held : In a claim for damages after the death of a person the provisions of the Fatel Accidents Act 1855 and the Legal Representatives Suits Act read with Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 apply. The damages are ascertained and shared and apportioned under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Loss of benefit to the dependant is to be apportioned between the widow and the children according the their needs and excepted life span and if these persons should get a share from the "loss to the estate" the same is to be deducted from the amount apportioned under the Fatal Accidents Act.
The loss to the "Estate" cannot be increased by computing the "lost earnings" for the "lost years".
1983 ACJ 221 MP - Dissented from.
In case where the recipients of the dependency under the Fatal Accidents Act and the loss to the Estate are the same, the compensation obtained by a person under the Fatal Accidents Act, after apportionment has to be reduced by the amount he receives as heir to the loss t the "Estate" the balance that remains payable under the Fatal Accidents award has to be added to the share obtainable towards "loss to the estate" and the sum total is recoverable. In case however the recipients under the Fatal Accidents Act are different from those of the loss to the "Estate", there is no question of such a deduction.
The provisions of Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 not only empower the Tribunal to make an Award which is "just" but also empower the said Tribunal to specify the person to whom the compensation shall be paid, thereby permitting apportionment of the compensation payable under the Fatal Accidents Act to persons other than those enumerated in the Fatal Accidents Act 1855. All the legal representatives of the deceased will be entitled to apportionment of the dependency according to their needs and according to their age and that apportionment is not limited to class of persons enumerated under Sec. 1(a) of the Fatal Accidents Act read with Section 4 thereof.
AIR 1981 Delhi 71 AIR 1981 Madhya Pradesh 151 1974 (1) MLJ 292 = 1974 ACJ 102. Dissented from.
The compensation payable to the dependents of the deceased is determined and apportioned by the Tribunal constituted under Motor Vehicles Act 1939, but the survival of the right in respect of the damages to the dependants and to the legal heirs could only be traced to the Fatal Accidents Act 1855 and the Legal Representatives Suits Act 1855. Once the right survives, the Tribunal exercises powers under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act 39 to apportion the dependency among the dependents under the Fatal Accidents Act 1855, in accordance with their needs and life span. But so far as the "loss to the Estate" is concerned the Tribunal has to divide the same in accordance with the personal law applicable to the deceased in case of intestacy or to the legal representatives, executors or legaties in accordance with law or any other testamentary directions.
Partly allowed.
( 1 ) THE following questions arise for consideration in this appeal as to how compensation under S. 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act is to be computed, what is meant by loss to the dependency and how is the multiplier to be chosen, what is meant by the loss to he estate and how is it to be computed, can the compensation be shared by the dependents not enumerated under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and finally as to how the compensation is to be apportioned?
( 2 ) THE deceased Mohd. Mahfooz was a carpenter when he died, he was aged 22 years. The accident occurred at 9. 45 p. m. on 14-11-1977 at Hanamakonda when a bus belonging to the appellant Corporation bearing the number APZ 8330 knocked down the deceased. The deceased was admitted in the Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Warangal and he expired on 21-11-1977 in the hospital at 9. 00 p. m. The deceased was a carpenter owning a carpentry shop at Hunter Road and was earning Rs. 400. 00 to Rs. 500. 00 per month. He left behind him his mother and four unmarried sisters as his heirs and dependents who filed O. P. No. 11/1978 on 5-61978 claiming Rs. 72, 000. 00 towards the dependency, at the rate of Rs. 1500. 00 p. a. for 48 years and Rs. 500. 00 towards damages to his clothing articles and cycle. The Corporation was impleaded as the Ist respondent and the driver as the 2nd respondents.
( 3 ) THE Tribunal held that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of the appellants driver. It accepted that the deceased was aged 22 years at his death, that he was earning Rs. 400. 00 to Rs. 500. 00 P. M. as a carpenter and would have given for the family at least Rs. 1500. 00 per annum for a period of 48 years i. e. , Rs. 72, 000. 00 inasmuch as he would have lived up to 70 years. An award was passed for the other damages of Rs. 500. 00 towards loss of clothing articles and cycle, in all making up a total of Rs. 72, 500. 00. Interest was granted at 6% p. a from the date of petition i. e. , 5-6-1978.
( 4 ) AGAINST the above award, the Corporation has filed the present appeal.
( 5 ) WE are not inclined to disturb the finding of the lower Court that the appellants driver was negligent. The finding in this regard is based on the evidence of P. W. 2, another cyclist who was cycling by the side of the deceased, the wound certificate Ex. A-1 and the other circumstances. This finding is therefore confirmed.
( 6 ) SRI C. Ananda Rao, the learned counsel for the Corporation contends that the Tribunal erred in taking a multiplier of 48. He also contended that the sisters of the deceased are not among the dependents enumerated in the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, that the provisions of S. 110-B are merely procedural and that they cannot confer any rights on the sisters of the deceased for claiming share in the dependency. He placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in N. I. Insurance Company v. Shanti Misra AIR 1976 SC 237.
( 7 ) ON the other hand, it is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents Sri K. F. Baba, that the multiplier adopted under law, be Rs. 2400. 00 p. a. and not Rs. 1500. 00 p. a. He also contended that the sisters of the deceased are entitled to be in the dependency in view of the special provisions of S. 11 of the Motor Vehicles Act which according to him are wider than those under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. He contends that the provisions of S. 110-B are also substantive in nature. According to him the sisters of the deceased are entitled to a share in the dependency in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Vanguard Insurance Company v. C. Hanumantha Rao (1975) 1 Andh WR 327 1975 Acc C. J. 344.
( 8 ) WE shall firstly address ourselves to these twin concept of loss to the dependency and loss to the estate.
( 9 ) THE loss of the benefit to the dependents is a concept derived from the English Fatal Accidents Act, 1846, known as the Lord Campbells Act. The corresponding law in India is the Fatal Accidents Act (Act 13 of 1855 )
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
