ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI
Joymalya Bagchi, K.Suresh Reddy, JJ.
Bajaj Allianz General - Appellant
Versus
Ragini Devi - Respondent
M.A.C.M.A. No. 332 of 2021
Decided On : 08-07-2021
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM - COMPENSATION - CALCULATION - FUTURE PROSPECTS - LOSS OF CONSORTIUM - LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION - FUNERAL EXPENSES - INTEREST - MODIFICATION OF AWARD.
Fact of the Case:
Deceased, a Petty Officer Cook in Naval Dockyard, died in a road accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.71,07,840/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing petition till the date of deposit and 6% per annum from the date of deposit till realization. The insurance company challenged the award, contending that the compensation was excessive and the Tribunal erred in calculating the salary, future prospects, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, and funeral expenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Tribunal correctly assessed the salary and future prospects of the deceased. The court also clarified that the compensation for loss of consortium is not restricted to Rs.40,000/- only for spousal consortium. In addition thereto, similar amounts of consortium may be extended under the heads of filial consortium and parental consortium. The court modified the award by reducing the compensation for loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, and funeral expenses.
Issues: 1. Whether the Tribunal erred in calculating the salary and future prospects of the deceased? 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding compensation for loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, and funeral expenses? 3. Whether the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal was excessive?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Tribunal correctly assessed the salary and future prospects of the deceased based on the evidence on record. 2. The court clarified that the compensation for loss of consortium is not restricted to Rs.40,000/- only for spousal consortium. In addition thereto, similar amounts of consortium may be extended under the heads of filial consortium and parental consortium. 3. The court reduced the rate of interest payable on the compensation amount from 9% per annum to 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit.
Final Decision: The court modified the award by reducing the compensation for loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, and funeral expenses. The court also reduced the rate of interest payable on the compensation amount from 9% per annum to 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit.
JUDGMENT
(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)
On the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing.
2. The appellant insurance company has assailed the award dated 30-09-2020 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum - VI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam (for short, 'the Tribunal'), in M.V.O.P.No. 280 of 2016, whereby the claim petition was allowed in the following terms:
The awarded amount shall be apportioned among petitioners 1 to 3 and Respondents 4 and 5 (parents of the deceased) as follows:
2. that the 1st petitioner is awarded a sum of Rs.21,07,840/- and she is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount and the remaining 50% shall be kept in Fixed Deposit for three years in any nationalized bank.
3. that the 2nd petitioner is awarded an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- and he is permitted to withdraw 1/4th of the amount if he already attained majority and the remaining 75% shall be kept in Fixed Deposit for three years in any nationalized bank.
4. that the 3rd petitioner is awarded an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- and the entire amount shall be kept in Fixed Deposit till he attains majority and on attaining majority he is permitted to withdraw 1/4th of the amount and the remaining 75% shall be kept in Fixed Deposit for three years thereafter in any nationalized bank.
5. that the 4th respondent (mother of the deceased) is awarded an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- and she is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount and the remaining 50% shall be kept in Fixed Deposit for two years in any nationalized bank.
6. that the 5th respondent (father of the deceased) is awarded an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and he is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount and the remaining 50% shall be kept in Fixed Deposit for two years in any nationalized bank.
7. that the Respondents 1 to 3 are directed to deposit the entire compensation amount within two months from the date of this judgment.
8. that the respondents 1 to 3 do also pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs.1,24,493/- (Rupees One lakh twenty four thousand four hundred and ninety three only) towards proportionate costs of the petition.
9. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.50,000/-.”
3. The factual matrix giving raise to appeal is to the effect that the deceased was working as a Petty Officer Cook in Naval Dockyard in Logistics Department, Visakhapatnam, and was receiving a salary of Rs.33,000/- per month. On 12-04-2015 around 13.35 hours, the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing registration No. AP 31 CL 5272 from Yarada junction towards Chinthalalova. En route, respondent No. 4 driving an auto bearing registration No. AP 31 TB 8237 in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained severe injuries. He was shifted to INS Kalyani Hospital, Visakhapatnam, where he died on the same day at 14.55 hours while undergoing treatment. Postmortem was also conducted in the said hospital. A criminal case, being crime No. 69 of 2015 under Sections 304-A and 279 IPC, was also registered against the driver of the offending vehicle. Owing to the sudden death of the deceased, respondent Nos. 1 to 3, being the wife and the minor sons respectively of the deceased, filed claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.75,00,000/-. In the course of the appellant/respondent filed his counter denying the age, income and occupation of the deceased and it was also denied that the deceased had died due to rash and negligent driving. However, the appellant admitted that the offending vehicle was covered under insurance policy issued by it
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.