Rekhabai and Another vs Basant Kumar Others

Hon''ble Prakash Shrivastava, J.—This appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the claimants who are the parents of the deceased against the award dated 5th October, 2009 passed by the learned II Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 22/2009.

One Kapil died in the road motor accident which took place on 15.4.2009, therefore, the claimant (parents of Kapil) had filed claim petition before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that at the time of accident, the deceased was about six and a half years of age, therefore, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 on account of loss of dependency. The Tribunal further awarded a lump sum amount of Rs. 25,000/- under other heads. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal together with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization.

It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail such as how the accident occurred, negligence in driving the offending vehicle, and liability to pay compensation, etc., because the Tribunal has already recorded the findings in favour of the apellant and none of those findings have been challenged at the instance of the respondents, i.e. owner/driver/ Insurance company by filing cross-objection or cross-appeal.

In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to burden the order by detailing the facts on those issues.

Mr. M. Jain, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal in the impugned award is inadequate and is on lower side. He has assaulted the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal has not properly considered the material on record while awarding the compensation.

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/ Insurance Company has made submissions in support of the findings of the Claims Tribunal and argued that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper which does not warrant any interfernce by this Court.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.

It is not in dispute that the deceased, at the time of accident was aged about six and a half years. Ext. P/ 13 is the marks-sheet of the deceased showing that at time of accident, he was studying in Class I and he was a good student. Considering the age of the deceased, family back ground of the appellants and other relevant considerations on record and also taking into account the judgment of this Court rendered in the matter of M.A. No. 1892/ 2008, Sekadiya and another v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Others, decided on 4th December, 2009 and also considering other facts and circumstances of this case, it is found to be a fit case to enhance the compensation amount which is awarded by the Tribunal by a further sum of Rs. 50,000/- which the appellant is entitled to receive in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal. This amount shall bear interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization.

Consequently, this appeal is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove, with no orders to costs.