AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sam Koshy, J
These are the two appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act arising out of a common award dated 10/10/2011 passed by the
learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh in Motor Accident Claim Case No.12/2009.
Vide the impugned award, the Tribunal in a death case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,91,000/-
with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of application.
MAC No.385/2012 is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company assailing the liability part and MAC No.156/2012 is an appeal filed by the
claimants seeking for enhancement of the compensation awarded. For convenience sake, we take the appeal of the Insurance Company first.
The contention of the counsel for the Insurance Company is that, the driver of the offending vehicle at the relevant point of time did not have a valid
license. It was also his contention that, the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the aspect of contributory negligence. He further submits that, the
driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid license stands proved from Ex-A/2 which they have produced in this appeal. It was further
contended that, there is a clear finding before the Tribunal that, the deceased was travelling on a Motorcycle when he was dashed by the vehicle
coming from the opposite direction and there was a head on collision. Since there was a head on collision, the aspect of contributory negligence stands
proved from its facts itself. No fresh evidence needs to be proved.
However, this Court is of the opinion that, both these grounds have not been sufficiently proved or established before the Tribunal by the Insurance
Company in as much as in spite of sufficient opportunity being granted, the Insurance Company has not led evidence of any of the witness to prove
these aspect. Further, as regards head on collision, there is no evidence come on record which shows that, the accident occurred on the center of the
road or the deceased who was traveling on a Motorcycle had crossed the wrong side of the road when the accident occurred. On the contrary, the
claimants have examined an eye witness namely Bhagirathi-AW/2 who have said that, it was the negligence on part of the driver of the offending
vehicle which resulted in the accident.
Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the counsel for the Insurance Company calling
for an interference with the impugned award.
So far as the appeal of the claimants is concerned, the counsel for the claimants submits that, the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower
side in as much as the accident is of April-2009 and the income assessed by the Tribunal is only Rs.3,000/- per month i.e. Rs.100/- per day which is
unreasonably low. It was further contended that, the claimants were also entitled for compensation under the future prospects while quantifying the
compensation and thus prayed for suitable enhancement of the award.
Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has no hesitation in accepting both these grounds raised by the counsel for the claimants
for the reason that, in April-2009, even an unskilled labour would had been earning more than Rs.150-200/- per day i.e. Rs.4,500-6,000/- per month.
Therefore, this Court assesses the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- and proceeds to quantify the compensation accordingly. The
claimants would also be entitled for 40% of the income towards future prospects which come to Rs.1,800/-. If Rs.1,800/- is added to the monthly
income, the figure would become Rs.6,300/- per month i.e. Rs.75,600/- yearly of which if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses, the amount
left would be Rs.50,400/- which if multiplied by applying multiplier of 16, the amount would come to Rs.8,06,400/-. Thus, the claimants shall be entitled
for a compensation of Rs.8,06,400/- towards loss of dependency. In addition, the claimants would also be entitled for an additional amount of
Rs.70,000/- towards the conventional head which would make the total compensation payable to the claimants at Rs.8,76,400/- instead of
Rs.3,91,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. The said enhanced amount shall also carry interest at the same rate as has been awarded by the Tribunal.
As a consequence, the appeal of Insurance Company i.e. MAC No. 385/2012 stands rejected and the appeal of claimants i.e. MAC No.156/2012
stands allowed and disposed off.