IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No. 64 of 2007
1. Md. Ayub
2. Hasma Khatoon ... ... ... ... ... Appellants
Versus
Md. Firoz... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... Respondents
------
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. Y. EQBAL
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
------
For the Appellant: Mr. Rajiv Anand
For the Respondents: Mr. ___________
------
11/ 14.12.2009
Appellants who are the father and mother of the deceased
filed Compensation Case No. 9 of 2003 before the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Ranchi for grant of compensation on account of
death of their son aged about 16 years in a Motor vehicles
accident. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- by way of
compensation. Hence, this appeal has been filed for enhancement
of compensation.
2. By order dated 19.02.2008 notices were issued to the
respondent-owner of the vehicle, but the respondent refused to
receive the registered notice. Again notices were issued to the
respondent by registered post and by order dated 2.12.2008 the
Lawazima Board accepted the notice as validly served and the
appeal was placed before the Bench. On 15.12.2008, this Bench by
way of abundant precaution again directed to issue notice by
ordinary process and the said notice was duly served. Again by
order dated 2.5.2009, registered notice were issued and the
Lawazima Bench again on 1.12.2009 accepted the notice as validly
served. It is, therefore, evidently clear that in spite of service of
notice the respondent has not appeared.
3. From perusal of the judgment, it further appears that before
the Tribunal also the respondent did not appear in spite of service
of notice and the claim case was decided ex-parte.
4. On being asked, learned counsel for the appellant submitted
even that compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal has not
been paid.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and
perused the impugned judgment. The claimant in the claim case
made out a case that the deceased was aged about 19 years and
the monthly earning of the deceased was Rs. 4000/-. Evidence to
that effect was adduced by the claimant by examining witnesses.
The Tribunal instead of relying on the evidence proceeded to
assess the compensation by taking notional income and
accordingly a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- has been awarded.
6. It is well settled that the principle of notional income applies
only when the deceased was a non-earning member. In the
instant case, evidence was led by the claimants to the effect that
the deceased was an earning member as monthly earning was Rs.
4000/- per month. This evidence was not controverted by the
respondent. Admittedly the deceased was an earning member and
even we take the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 2000/-
the compensation amount cannot be less than Rs. 2,00,000/-.
7. Hence for the ends of justice and on the basis of the
evidence adduced by the claimants, we are of the view that
compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- will be just and reasonable
compensation.
8. We, therefore, allow this appeal and enhance the
compensation amount from Rs. 1,05,000/- to Rs. 2,00,000/- which
shall be paid by the respondent within four weeks from today.
(M. Y. Eqbal, J)
( Jaya Roy , J)
Alankar/