Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1093 (JHR)

Gyatri Devi v. Baijnath Sahu

2008-09-09

JAYA ROY, M.Y.EQBAL

body2008
Order Heard the parties. 2. This appeal by the claimants-appellants is for enhancement of compensation amount awarded by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicle Accidents Claim Tribunal Ranchi against the judgment/award dated 19.7.03 passed in Compensation Case No. 104/97. By the said judgment, a sum of Rs. 1 ,69,000/- has been awarded to the claimants from the death of the deceased, Prithvi Nath Singh in a motor vehicle accident. 3. Since the factum of the accident and the insurance of the vehicle has not been denied and disputed by the respondents. The only issue left is with regard to the quantum of compensation payable to the claimants. According to the claimants the deceased was a constable in Bihar Police Service and was getting a salary of Rs. 5,000/- although, the pay slip with regard to the salary of the deceased was filed by the claimants but the same has not been proved. The Tribunal took a lump sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month as the income of the deceased. After deducting one-third of the said amount, the Tribunal assessed the aforesaid amount of compensation. 4. The matter was first heard on 4.3.08. In course of the argument, it was argued by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that at the relevant time the deceased was posted as a constable in Tatisilwai Police Station. This court adjourned the hearing and called for a report from the Officer-in-Charge, Tatisilwai Police Station as to whether the deceased was posted during that time in the said police station. 5. Pursuant td the said order, a report was submitted by the Officer-in-Charge certifying that the deceased was posted at the relevant time as constable in Tatisilwai Police Station. By filing supplementary affidavit, a fresh copy of the pay slip has been filed by the appellant and annexed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit. 6. Before the Tribunal, the salary certificate issued under the signature of Senior Superintendent of Police was filed and the genuineness of the said document was not disputed by the respondents. Merely because the document was not proved and marked as Exhibit, the Tribunal should not have debarred from considering the same. 7. 6. Before the Tribunal, the salary certificate issued under the signature of Senior Superintendent of Police was filed and the genuineness of the said document was not disputed by the respondents. Merely because the document was not proved and marked as Exhibit, the Tribunal should not have debarred from considering the same. 7. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 lays down the procedure and powers of Claims Tribunal, which runs as follows:- (1) In holding any inquiry under Section 168, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it things fit. (2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and materials objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed, and. the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). (3) Subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, the Claims Tribunal may, for the purposes of adjudicating upon any claim for compensation, choose one or more persons possessing special knowledge of any matter relevant to the inquiry to assist it in holding the inquiry. 8. From bare perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is manifestly clear that while deciding the claim cases, the Tribunal shall follow a summary procedure as it thinks fit. Sub-section 3 of Section 169 confers power to the Tribunal to choose one or more persons possessing special knowledge of any matter relevant to the inquiry for the purpose of adjudicating upon any claim for compensation. 9. Similarly, Rule 239 of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules, 1992 lays down the manner of recording the evidence by the Tribunal. Rule 239 provides that the Tribunal shall make a brief memorandum of the substance of the evidence of every witness as examination of the witness proceeds and such memorandum shall be written and signed by the members of the Chairman thereof, which shall form part of the record. 10. Rule 239 provides that the Tribunal shall make a brief memorandum of the substance of the evidence of every witness as examination of the witness proceeds and such memorandum shall be written and signed by the members of the Chairman thereof, which shall form part of the record. 10. Nowhere in the Motor Vehicles Rules it is specifically provided that the rule of evidence shall strictly apply in the matter of adjudicating the claim cases under the Motor Vehicles Act. 11. Reading Section 169 alongwith Rule 239 of the Rules, it is clear that where a document filed by the one party and not disputed by other party, can be looked into by the Tribunal, irrespective of the proof, and marking of the document as Exhibit. 12. In the instant case as noticed above, the salary certificate was issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police showing that the take home salary of the deceased was Rs. 4,301/- and the gross salary was Rs. 4,561/-. There is no question of disbelieving the amount of salary mentioned in the salary certificate. 13. In our opinion, the Tribunal ought to have taken the salary as mentioned in the salary certificate, produced before it. 14. Having regard to the facts and discussion made above, there is no option but to hold that the take home salary, as per the salary certificate of the deceased, was Rs. 4,301/-. If one-third out of the said amount is deducted, the monthly dependency comes to Rs. 3,870/-. Accordingly, the annual dependency comes to Rs. 34,440/-. 15. From perusal of para 11 of the judgment/award, it appears that the age of the deceased as per post mortem report was 55 years. 16. We are therefore, of the view that a multiplier of 9 should be taken for the purpose of assessing the compensation amount, the net amount comes to Rs. 3,09,960/-. 17. We, therefore, hold that a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rs. Three lakhs only) should have been awarded by the Tribunal inclusive of the amount, which was paid by way of interim compensation. This appeal is, therefore, allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced to R5. 3,00,000/- (Rs. Three lakhs only). 18. Needless to say that out of the aforesaid amount, the amount paid by way of interim compensation, shall be deducted. 19. This appeal is, therefore, allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced to R5. 3,00,000/- (Rs. Three lakhs only). 18. Needless to say that out of the aforesaid amount, the amount paid by way of interim compensation, shall be deducted. 19. We further hold that the compensation amount shall carry interest @ 9% only from the date of the judgment/award passed by the Tribunal.