Phooli Devi and Others vs Koja Ram @ Mangu Ram and Others

Viney Mittal, J.—The claimants are in appeal. They want further enhancement of compensation as awarded by Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal vide order dated January 19, 1998.

An accident took place on July 20, 1997, wherein Lala Ram, who was driving the truck, died, when a bus bearing No. GJ-1V-2110, being

driven by Koja Ram dashed against the truck. Lala Ram was 32 years of age at the time of the accident.

The claimants, who are the widow, minor children and mother of the deceased Lala Ram, filed a claim petition. In the claim petition, it was

claimed that the accident in question had been caused on account of rash and negligent driving of Koja Ram. It was further claimed by the

claimants that at the time of accident, Lala Ram was having monthly income of Rs. 4,000.

The learned Tribunal, on the basis of evidence available on record, found that Koja Ram, driver of the bus in question, was rash and negligent in

his driving and, therefore, the accident in question had been caused. Consequently, the claimants were held entitled to compensation. The

compensation was held payable by the driver, owner and United India Insurance Company the insurer of the offending bus. The Tribunal further

found that the employer of the deceased driver had appeared and stated that Lala Ram, at the time of his death, was being paid a monthly salary of

Rs. 2,000. Consequently, his dependency was assessed at Rs. 1,600, multiplier of ''16'' was applied. In these circumstances, compensation was

assessed as Rs. 2,56,000, payable with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have also gone through the record of the case.

Learned Counsel appearing for the claimant-appellants has argued that income of the deceased Lala Ram has been assessed on the lower side

and, therefore, the claimants were entitled to enhancement of the compensation.

Having gone through the record of the case and after perusing the findings recorded by the Tribunal, I do not find any merit in the contentions of

the learned Counsel. The Tribunal has taken into consideration the written statement filed by M/s. Moti Theatre i.e., owner of the truck, in whose

employment Lala Ram was employed as a driver. In the aforesaid written statement, it was specially mentioned that Lala Ram deceased was

getting salary of Rs. 2,000 per month. No evidence to the contrary was led to show that the deceased Lal Ram was receiving any higher salary.

Consequently, there is absolutely no material before this Court to hold that salary of Lala Ram had been assessed on the lower side.

As a result of the aforesaid discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeal and the same is, consequently, dismissed.