AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.C. Kandpal, J.—This appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 26-9-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, U.S. Nagar, in MACT Case No. 34 of 2004.
Brief facts of the case are that on 23.2.2002 Pritam Singh at about 7.30 A.M. was going to his place of service from his village. When he reached at Bhurarani Moar, Truck No. UGP 4389 dashed him on wrong side. Pritam Singh sustained grievous injuries. He was admitted in Government Hospital, Rudrapur. From there he was referred to Haldwani and again he was admitted at Rudrapur Hospital. Thereafter, he was brought to his home, where he died on 1.10.2002 due to the injuries sustained by him in the above accident. According to the claimants, he was 35 years of age and was earning Rs. 3,000/- per month from labour work. The claimants filed petition for Rs. 7,00,000/-.
The Opposite Party No. 1 owner of the truck filed written statement and alleged that the driver of the truck was possessing valid driving license. The truck at the time of accident was insured with New India Assurance Company. The owner of the truck alleged that the liability to pay compensation is upon the shoulder of the insurer.
The Opposite Party No. 2/New India Assurance Company contested the case by filing its written statement and denied the allegations of the petition. The insurer took the plea that the driver had no valid driving license and the documents of the truck were invalid, therefore, there is no liability of the company to pay compensation.
On the pleadings of parties, the Tribunal framed relevant issues in the petition. Thereafter, parties led evidence before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing learned Counsel for the parties and considering the evidence on record, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,91,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 5% per annum from the date of presentation of petition till the date of actual payment payable by the New India Assurance Company.
Feeling aggrieved the New India Assurance Company has preferred this appeal before this Court.
None has appeared on behalf of the respondents inspite of sufficient service. I have heard Sri R.B. Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant and perused the record.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the death of the deceased in an accident was not proved by the cogent evidence and the Tribunal has wrongly relied upon the version of the claimant who was not an eye witness of the accident. He also submitted that the Tribunal has adopted multiplier on higher side in view of latest pronouncements by the Hon''ble Apex Court.
From perusal of evidence on record it reveals that the claimant Smt. Gurmeet Kaur, P.W.1, has deposed that Breet Singh had given her the information about the accident. The Opposite Party No. 1, in its written statement has admitted the accident with its vehicle. The Opposite Party/appellant has not adduced any evidence to establish this fact that the deceased did not sustain injuries in the accident and he has died for some other reasons. The copy of F.I.R. was filed on record in which the negligence of the driver was narrated. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the death of the deceased has occurred due to injuries sustained by him in the accident which took place due to the negligence of the driver of vehicle No. UGP 4389.
As regards the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/-. According to the claimants the deceased used to do labour work in Plywood and was earning about Rs. 3,000/- per month. This fact has not been controverted from the side of the Opposite Party by adducing evidence. Therefore, the assessment of the Tribunal cannot be said to be baseless. The Tribunal after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, assessed the monthly dependency of the claimants at Rs. 2,000/-. At the time of accident the age of the deceased was 35 years and the Tribunal adopted the multiplier of 16. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal appears to be on higher side in view of the verdict given by the Hon''ble Apex Court in the Case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kalpana and Ors. reported in 2007(1) Scc 514, where the deceased was 33 years of age and the Hon''ble Apex Court applied the multiplier of 13 and the case of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. v. S. Rajapriya and Ors reported in 2005(4) SCC 87, where the Hon''ble Supreme Court has adopted the multiplier of ''12'' at the age 38 years. Further, in the case of The Managing Director, TNSTC v. Sripriya and Ors. reported in 2007 (5) Supreme 301, the Hon''ble Apex Court applied the multiplier of ''12'' where the deceased was 37 years of age. Therefore, the multiplier which has been applied by the Tribunal in the instant case appears to be wrong in view of the aforesaid judgments of the Hon''ble Apex Court. In my opinion the suitable multiplier in the instant case should be ''13'' instead of 16. Therefore, after adopting the multiplier of 13, the dependency of the claimants upon the deceased comes to Rs. 24,000/- X 13=Rs. 3,12,000/-. The Tribunal also awarded Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of estate and loss of consortium, which shall remain intact. Therefore, the total compensation comes to Rs. 3,12,000/-+ Rs. 2,000/- + Rs. 5,000/- = Rs. 3,19,000/-. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal shall remain intact.
For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is liable to be partly allowed.
Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 26-9-2006 is modified upto the extent that the claimants are entitled to get a sum of Rs. 3,19,000/-as compensation, payable by New India Assurance Company, instead of Rs. 3,91,000/- as has been awarded by the Tribunal. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal shall remain intact.
The amount of compensation, if any, deposited in this Court, be remitted to the Tribunal concerned.