Rambai and Others vs Narendra Singh and Others

M.K. Mudgal, J.—This is an appeal filed by the claimants u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 25.1.2007 passed by Additional MACT Ambah District Morena, in Claim case No. 16 of 2006. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 61,000/- with interest to the claimants for the death of one Ramsanehi about 55 years of Age who died in vehicle accident on 5.2.2005. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have filed this appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and if so to what extent ?. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants'' favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross appeal or cross objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.

As observed supra, it is a death case. One Ram Sanehi about 55 years of age who died in vehicle accident on 25.1.2005 while he was going to Porsa along with his nephew Ramkumar Sharma in Mini Bus bearing No. M.P.-06/B-1687 which turned turtle in the way giving rise to the filing of claim petition by legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal after assessing income of deceased Rs. 1250/- per month and applying the multiplier of 5 and holding that he was spending 1/3rd on himself as personal expenses by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 61,000/- breakup of which is as under:-

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was husband of appellant no. 1 and father of appellant no. 2. Due to his death, the family suffered great monetary loss. He used to earn the money and spend the same on the family. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the learned tribunal assessed the yearly income of the deceased @ Rs. 15,000/- per annum and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses applied the multiplier of 5. It is submitted that the income of the deceased is assessed on lower side and looking to the number of dependents deduction of 1/3rd is on higher side. It is submitted that on other heads also amount awarded is on lower side. It is submitted that the appeal filed by the appellants be allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 3, submits that the amount awarded by learned Tribunal is just and proper and do not deserve any enhancement.

I have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimants. After taking into consideration all the evidence on record, it is apparent that the accident is of the year 2005 and the amount awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side which deserves to be enhanced. Keeping in view the above, assessing the monthly income of deceased at Rs. 2500/- per month and also making 1/3rd deduction towards the personal expenses and considering the age of deceased being 62 years, the multiplier of 6 would be appropriate. Hence, the claimants are entitled to the following amounts:

Thus, the appellants are entitled for Rs. 1,45,000/- instead of Rs. 61,000/-. The enhanced amount of Rs. 84,000/- shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application.

The amount awarded shall be deposited by the Insurance Company with the learned Tribunal and the learned tribunal is directed to disburse it to the appellants equally.

With the aforesaid modification the appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs.