Research › Browse › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 11 (MP)

New India Assurance Co. v. Dharamraj

1998-01-07

S.B.SAKRIKAR

body1998
JUDGMENT The appellant New India Assurance Company alongwith owner of the offending vehicle have filed this appeal against the award dated 27th November, 1992, rendered by I Additional MACT Barwani in Claim Case No. 2 of 1986 thereby awarding compensation of Rs. 50,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. in favour of the claimant/respondents No. 1 and 2 and against appellants and respondent No. 3 for the death of Ajay Kumar, aged about 7 years, in the accident. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 12.9.85, Ajay Kumar, a boy of about 7 years of age met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration No. CPW 7317 resulting into the death of Ajay Kumar. On the date of alleged accident, appellant No. 2 Guljarilal was the registered owner of the vehicle and it was driven by respondent No. 3 Suratsingh and insured with appellant No. 1, The New India Assurance Company. Respondents No. 1 and 2 father and mother of the deceased child filed claim petition for award of compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the tribunal. The Claim Petition was resisted on behalf of the appellants. On consideration, the tribunal allowed the petition and awarded compensation in favour of the respondents No. 1 and 2 claimants and against appellants and respondent No. 3 as indicated above. Aggrieved, the appellants have filed this appeal against the impugned award of the tribunal. I have heard Shri Surjeet Singh learned counsel for the-appellants and Shri Rajpal learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2. None appeared for respondent No. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the tribunal has committed an error in awarding Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for the death of a boy, who is only about 7 years of age. The tribunal has not considered the aspect of dependency while assessing compensation. The counsel also submitted that in view of the date of accident under "no fault liability" the compensation cannot exceed Rs. 15,000/-. The compensation awarded by the tribunal is on higher side and requires modification. The counsel relied on the decision of this Court in case of Govind Das and another v. Yaqub Khan and Others [ 1996 ACJ 414 ]. 15,000/-. The compensation awarded by the tribunal is on higher side and requires modification. The counsel relied on the decision of this Court in case of Govind Das and another v. Yaqub Khan and Others [ 1996 ACJ 414 ]. As against this, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2 contended that after coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as amended by Act No. 54 of 1994, the compensation in case of fatal accident shall not be less that Rs. 50,000/- on the principle of "no fault liability" and as such the tribunal has committed no error in awarding the compensation of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of respondents No. 1 and 2 for the death of their son, Ajay Kumar. The counsel placed reliance on the Division Bench decision of this Court in case of Dev Chand and another v. Babulal Faujdar Bus Service and another [1997 ACJ 392] and in case of MPSRT Corpn. v. Abdul Rahman; [ AIR 1997 MP 248 .] Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record as also the impugned award, in my opinion, the compensation awarded by the tribunal for the death of said Ajay Kumar, aged about 7 years, cannot be considered to be excessive. On corning into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the amendment incorporated by Act No. 54 of 1994, minimum compensation payable in the case of death is Rs. 50,000/-. In case of Dev Chand and another (Supra) the Division Bench of this Court has also awarded Rs. 50,000/- compensation together with interest @ 12% per annum for the death of a child aged only five years on the ground of amendment incorporated in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court held that "Corning to the compensation, the child was aged about 5 years. On the guess-work as the deceased was a child and was a non-earning member looking to the intention of Parliament in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, that for the death of a person in case of "no fault liability" the compensation should not be less than Rs. 50,000, we are of the opinion that an amount of Rs. On the guess-work as the deceased was a child and was a non-earning member looking to the intention of Parliament in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, that for the death of a person in case of "no fault liability" the compensation should not be less than Rs. 50,000, we are of the opinion that an amount of Rs. 50,000/- would be just compensation to which the appellants would be entitled with interest at the rate of 12% per annum." A similar view was taken by another Division Bench of this Court in case of MPSRT Corpn. (Supra) that where there is no material for determination of compensation, minimum compensation of Rs. 50,000/- as fixed in the case of "no fault" for a human life by the Parliament under S. 140 of the Act should be taken as a guide for determining the compensation in a fatal accident case without going into the estimation of dependency and applying the multiplier method. In this case also the Division Bench upheld the compensation of Rs. 50,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. for the death of a child of four years of age. The facts of the case of Govind Das (Supra) relied on by the appellants, are different and distinguishable than the facts of the case on hand. In the instant case, the Court declined to enhance the compensation awarded by the tribunal by the interim order passed under "no failt fault liability" in an appeal filed against the final award of the tribunal. Considering the facts of the case on hand and the law applicable, I do not find that any interference is necessary in the compensation as awarded by the tribunal. In the result, this appeal is devoid of any merits and substance and the same is accordingly, dismissed with no orders as to costs.