United India Insurance Company Limited vs Sunita and Others

Jitendra Chauhan, J.

C.M. No. 4805-CII-2011

Despite sufficient opportunity, no reply has been filed by the respondents.

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 2 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned.

Main appeal

The present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company, challenging the impugned award dated 14.10.2010, passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panipat (in short ''the Tribunal''). Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal committed a grave error in applying the multiplier of 18, according to the age of the deceased, whereas, in view of the law laid down in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shanti Pathak and Others, , the same should be applied according to the age of the dependents, as the deceased was unmarried.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier and awarded the compensation. He prays for the dismissal of the appeal..

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

The factum of accidental death of Sachin, son of the claimants-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 is not in dispute. He was bachelor at the time of his death. The learned Tribunal, while determining the multiplier to be applied in the claim petition, has considered the age of the deceased and not the age of the parents, which is correct in view of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Amrit Bhanu Shali and Others Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others, , wherein, it has been observed that the selection of multiplier should be based on the age of the deceased and not on the basis of the age of the dependents as there may be a number of dependents whose age may be different. Moreover, the Motor Vehicles Act, being a beneficial legislation, this Court relies on Amrit Bhann''s case (supra), which is subsequent to the case law cited by learned counsel for the appellant in Smt. Shanti Pathak''s case (supra).

No other point is raised.

In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present appeals. As such, both the appeals are dismissed. However, the statutory amount deposited by the appellant at the time of filing the appeal be sent to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants.