Non-pecuniary damages for loss of expectation of life, pain and suffering, and loss of amenities are payable in every case of fatal accident, even in cases of instantaneous death. The conventional amount for such damages is Rs. 15,000/-.

JUDGMENT :

1. This is an appeal preferred by the legal representatives of the deceased claiming compensation in a sum of Rs. 52,000/- under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The accident occurred on 8-4-1984 and the deceased who met with the accident died three days later, on 11-4-1984. At the time of death, the deceased was was aged 40 years and it is claimed that he was earning Rs. 30/- per day by selling kirana articles on his cycle. The Tribunal went into this question and awarded a sum of Rs. 25,600/-, out of which Rs. 21,600/- is relatable to the loss of dependancy and Rs. 4,000/- is towards loss of consortium. Interest was awarded at 6% P.A. from the date of petition. The claimants in this case are the wife, mother and two sons of the deceased.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant, Sri P. Gopaldas representing Sri P. Ramakrishna Raju has contended that the award is liable to be enhanced not only by increasing pecuniary damages but that some amount must be awarded for the non-pecuniary damages, in all cases of death. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Sri S. Hanumaiah has, however, contended that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is sufficient. He also contended that in view of the Judgment of the Full Bench in A.P.S.R.T.C. v. Narsavva1 no amount is payable towards pain and suffering (physical or mental) or loss of ameneties. He also contended that in cases of death, instantaneous or otherwise, no amount can be claimed towards non-pecuniary damages viz., loss of expectation of life, pain and suffering and loss of ameneties. On these contentions four points arise for consideration:—

(1) Whether the decision of the Full Bench in A.P.S.R.T.C. v. Narsavva1 precludes the making of an award for pain and suffering, (physical or mental), or other non-pecuniary damages or loss to the estate?

(2) What is the life-span or expectation of life, at different age levels applicable to our country?

(3) Whether in case of death, (instantaneously or otherwise), it is not obligatory for the Tribunal to award non-pecuniary damages for loss of expectation of life, pain and suffering and loss of ameneties—for the short interval before the death—and if so what should the conventional amount be?

(4) Whether, on facts, any enhancement is to be made in the pecuniary damages or loss to the dependancy?

4. Point No. 1:—It is argued for the respondent that in view of the judgment of the Full Bench in A.P.S.R.T.C. v. Narsavva1, no award should be made towards pain and suffering. In my opinion, this submission is not correct. In that case, the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards the mental pain and suffering of the ‘dependants’. That was held to be not permissible in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in N. Sivammal v. Managing Director, Pandian Roadways Corporation2 where the Supreme Court set aside a similar award of Rs. 5,000/- towards the mental agony of the ‘dependants’ made by the Madras High Court. The Full Bench also partly over-ruled Srisailam Devasthanam v. Pramilamma3 where also a sum of Rs. 2000/- was awarded towards mental pain suffered by the ‘dependants’.

3. The distinction between the above rulings and the present case is that we are here concerned not with the award for the pain and suffering of the ‘dependants' but with the pain and suffering of the ‘deceased’, i.e. for that endured between the time of the accident and his death. It is now too well settled by several decisions in England and India that under the head of loss to the estate or the non-pecuniary damages as they are called, we have to make an award for pain and suffering of the ‘deceased’, loss of expectation of life and loss of ameneties. Though in the case of a claim by an injured person, the award towards pain and suffering and loss of ameneties may be substantial—still, conventional damages have to be awarded even in case of death, towards the pain and suffering and loss of ameneties attributable