IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Shyamlal
2011-09-16
DINESH MAHESHWARI
body2011
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT 1. - With the contesting parties having appeared and for the reasons and circumstances noticed infra, this appeal is taken up for final disposal at this stage itself while dispensing with service on the other respondents. 2. The insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 26.04.2011 as made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara in Claim Case No.479/2008 essentially contending against the quantum of compensation awarded. 3. In impugned award dated 26.04.2011, the Tribunal concerned examined the claim for compensation as made by the claimants-respondents Nos.1 to 4 on account of death of Smt.Pushpa, wife of the respondent No.1 and mother of the respondents Nos.2 to 4, due to the injuries sustained in the accident caused by the vehicle insured with the appellant. After deciding the relevant issues in favour of the claimants, the Tribunal proceeded to quantify the compensation and for the purpose, considered the age of deceased in the age group of 45-50 years and with reference to her contribution to the family comprising of her husband, about 50-52 years of age and the children in the age group of 20-24 years, awarded total compensation in the sum of Rs. 4,90,000/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e., 24.05.2008 with the direction for adjustment of the amount of Rs. 50,000/- received towards no fault liability; and with further directions for distribution of the amount amongst the claimants and depositing of a part of amount of compensation in fixed deposits for the respective claimants. The insurer has filed this appeal essentially contending that the quantum of compensation so awarded is much on the higher side and is too excessive. The claimants-respondents Nos.1 to 4 have put appearance in caveat. 4. During the course of submissions, the learned counsel for the parties arrived at a consensus that the quantum of compensation as awarded may be suitably modified and agreed that the amount of Rs. 4,90,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal may be reduced to Rs. 3,70,000/-. The learned counsel have placed on record in writing the consensus as arrived at. 5. The submissions as made by the learned counsel for the parties appear just and reasonable.
4,90,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal may be reduced to Rs. 3,70,000/-. The learned counsel have placed on record in writing the consensus as arrived at. 5. The submissions as made by the learned counsel for the parties appear just and reasonable. The award as made by the Tribunal in the present case appears to be excessive and beyond the reasonable amount of compensation allowable. It appears that the Tribunal proceeded on quantification only with application of multiplier but other mitigating factors regarding age and status of parties have not been given due consideration. In the overall circumstances, this Court is satisfied that the amount of compensation as agreed to by the parties at Rs. 3,70,000/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum shall be that of just compensation and the modification of the award impugned accordingly shall meet the ends of justice. 6. In view of the aforesaid, this appeal is partly allowed; the impugned award dated 26.04.2011 is modified; and the amount of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal at Rs. 4,90,000/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 24.05.2008 shall stand modified and the claimants shall be entitled to compensation in the sum of Rs. 3,70,000/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 24.05.2008. 7. It shall be required of the appellant to deposit the remaining amount payable under the modified award, after adjustment of the amount of Rs. 50,000/- already paid towards interim compensation, within 30 days from today. On deposit, the Tribunal shall carry out its disbursement in the manner and proportion as contemplated by the award impugned. There shall be no order as to costs of this appeal.Appeal Partly Allowed. *******