A.K. Pandya and Manjudevei vs Shankar Naidu and National Insurance Co. Ltd.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 16/12/2004 passed in MVC No. 4102/2003, by the XVI Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City (SCCH-14), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realization, as against the claim of the appellants for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-, on account of the death the deceased Kum. Juhi Kumari @ Juhi Pandya, in the road traffic accident is inadequate. In brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Kum. Juhi Kumari @ Juhi Pandya, who was hale and healthy prior to the accident. That at about 5.00 p.m. on 25.7.2003 the deceased was traveling in a tractor bearing No. AAC-7312 and Trailer No. AAC-4304 along with others and when the said Tractor came near Basavanagara Seetharam Palya road, the driver of the Tractor drove the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed, due to which, deceased bounced and fell down and sustained injuries all over the body and on the way to hospital she succumbed to the injuries. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, appellants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the owner and Insurer of the vehicle.

It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was a minor girl aged about 10 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident and was a brilliant student. Due to her sudden death, appellants have lost their child who was their future, apart from mental shock and agony.

The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- under different heads with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, fastening the liability on respondent No. 1, owner of the Tractor-trailer.

Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.

We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for second respondent. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and after careful perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it is manifest on the face of the judgment that, the occurrence of the accident on 25.7.2003 and the resultant death of deceased Kum. Juhi Kumari is not in dispute. Further, it is also not in dispute that appellants are the parents of the deceased and deceased was minor as on the date of the accident. Since the deceased was a minor girl, as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in catena of judgments, appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards loss of dependency and some reasonable amount towards conventional heads. The Tribunal, after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in catena of judgments, has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards loss of dependency and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards conventional heads such as, funeral and obsequies expense, transportation of dead body and loss of expectancy and love and affection, in all, Rs. 1,60,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition ill its realization. Therefore, we do not find any error or illegality, much less material irregularity as such committed by the Tribunal in awarding the compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., on account of the death of the deceased. Nor the appellants have made out any good grounds to entertain the relief sought in this appeal. Taking all these factors into consideration, the appeal filed by the appellants is dismissed as devoid of merits.