Durga Prasad and Another vs Dinesh Kumar and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—This is claimants appeal filed u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth "the Act") for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (henceforth "the Tribunal"), vide award dated 05.02.1998 passed in Claim Case No. 6/92.

The claimants, unfortunate parents and younger brothers of deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal claimed compensation of Rs. 5,45,000/- by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Act for his death in the motor accident on 17.10.1990, when his scooter bearing registration No. MIT - 4484 was dashed by the offending Vehicle Metador bearing registration No. MKR -1218, resulting in multiple serious injuries to Nand Kishore Agrawal, who when brought to the hospital was declared dead. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal used to earn Rs. 2,500/- per month from his business.

The owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle - Metador consteasted the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The insurer took the plea that the driver of the offending vehicle - Metador was not holding a valid driving licence and the Metador was being plied in breach of the policy conditions.

The claimants examined AW/1 - Durga Prasad, AW/2 - Suresh Dewangan, AW/3 - Ashok Kumar and AW/4 - Rajesh in support of their claim, whereas the owner, driver and the insurer of the Metador did not examine any witness in rebuttal.

The Tribunal on the evidence led by the parties held that deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 17.10.1990; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle - Metodor; as the Metador was insured on the date of the accident with United India Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

As the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was not found reliable by the Tribunal, the income of the deceased was assessed at Rs. 1,000/- per month by the Tribunal on its own estimate. By deducting a sum of Rs. 250/- per month as the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'' dependency was assessed at Rs. 750/- per month and Rs. 9,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 9,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,44,000/-. By awarding a further sum of Rs. 5,000/- under other permissible heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,49,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal in the motor accident on 17.10.1990. The Tribunal further awarded interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 1,49,000/- @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri Venkateshwar Tiwari, learned Counsel for the Appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 1,000/- per month only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 16; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,49,000/- only.

Shri Prashant Jayaswal, learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No. 3/United India Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and submitted that the compensation of Rs. 1,49,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, in the facts of the present case, is just and proper compensation.

The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 17.10.1990; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle - Metador and the Insurer of the Metador was liable to pay compensation to the claimants are not under challenge before us in this appeal. That apart, there is overwhelming evidence on record to establish the above facts beyond any shadow of doubt. We, therefore, affirm the findings recorded by the Tribunal in that behalf.

The claimants in their claim petition pleaded that deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal used to earn Rs. 2,500/- per month, but no reliable and clinching evidence was led to establish the said income of the deceased. In this state of evidence, the Tribunal was left with no other option, but to assess the income of the deceased on its own estimate. Considering that deceased Nand Kishore Agrawal, according the evidence of AW -1 Durga Prasad Agrawal, used to assist this witness in his business, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income by the Tribunal at Rs. 1,000/-per month.

The Tribunal has been quite liberal in deducting only 1/4th of Rs. 1,000/- as the personal expenses of the deceased and assessing the claimants dependency at Rs. 750/- per month and Rs. 9,000/- per annum.

The multiplier of 16 selected by the Tribunal is also on the higher side. In the absence of any appeal by the Respondents against the award, we do not deem it proper to reduce the multiplier selected by the Tribunal.

For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of assessment of the income of the deceased or claimants dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected.

The appeal filed by the Appellants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.