Posted On by &filed under High Court, Madhya Pradesh High Court.


Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nathoolal Patel And Ors. vs Nayak Narendra And Anr. on 12 October, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2002 ACJ 1809
Author: B Singh
Bench: B Singh, R Gupta


JUDGMENT

Bhawani Singh, C.J.

1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, dated 24.1.1997, in Claim Case No. 101 of 1994.

2. Accident took place on 9.12.1989 when truck No. 86 D 63 626 N tactical No. 363 hit Ashok Kumar Patel and he died instantaneously. The claimants are father, mother and widow of deceased, who was 23 years old at the time of accident. He was married to claimant No. 3 Sankhibai out of whom she gave birth to a child after the accident. It is submitted that the deceased was first class graduate and was studying B.Ed, course. He was undertaking private tuition earning Rs. 500 per month. Allegation is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck driver otherwise it could not have taken place. This allegation is denied by the respondents. The deceased was responsible for the accident and he could not have earned the income as suggested by the claimants.

3. The Tribunal has rejected the defence of respondents and accepted the claim preferred by the claimants. Accordingly, award for Rs. 1,69,000 carrying interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum for four years has been made and interest for the remaining period has been disallowed. Claimants are dissatisfied with the award, hence this appeal.

4. Counsel for the parties heard. After going through the evidence in this case, we are of opinion that evidence with regard to the income of the deceased has not been assessed properly. It is submitted that the deceased was a brilliant student and was pursuing B.Ed, course at his own expenses, he had potential to be employed as teacher and earn handsome salary. However, in the absence of dependable evidence, it would be desirable to fix his income at Rs. 15,000 per annum as per Second Schedule under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act providing income of unemployed deceased. Deducting 1/3rd for his personal expenses, annual dependency would be Rs. 10,000. The proper multiplier in this case should be 17 instead of 16 applied by the Tribunal. Thus counted, the compensation payable to the claimants in this case is (Rs. 10,000 x 17) = Rs. 1,70,000. In addition to this Sankhibai would be entitled to solatium Rs. 5,000. That apart, claimants would be entitled to Rs. 10,000 for loss of expectancy of life, Rs. 2,000 for funeral expenses, Rs. 2,500 loss to the estate, taking total amount of compensation to Rs. 1,89,500. The decision of Claims Tribunal as to the rate of interest and the manner of payment would apply to enhanced compensation in this case.

5. We are told that Sankhibai gave birth to a child after the death of deceased. The child is not a party to this case. However, impleadment is not necessary requirement of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The claimants in this case act as representatives for his interest as well so far as the entitlement and apportionment of compensation is concerned. The enhanced amount along with interest shall be deposited in the name of the child in F.D.R. in a nationalised bank through Sankhibai till the child attains majority. Tribunal will ensure the protection of interest of the child while dealing with the release of compensation amount in this case.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.182 seconds.