Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 411 (RAJ)

Rama Kant Sharma v. R. S. R. T. C.

2012-02-10

NISHA GUPTA

body2012
GUPTA, J.—This misc. appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles act, 1988 for enhancement of the amount of compensation against the award dated 19.10.2001 passed by learned MACT, Dholpur in MAC No. 105/1995 whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded in favour of the claimant-appellant. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal as alleged in the claim petition are that the claimant-appellant has filed a claim petition before the MACT, Dholpur stating therein that on 14.8.1995, deceased Prakash was traveling in Bus No. RJ14-3M-2234 from Karauli to Delhi. At about 4.00 a.m., when the Bus reached near Faridabad Megwaj Restaurant, the driver of the Bus hit the Bus with standing Truck in rash and negligent manner. Due to this, Prakash had died. The present claimant/appellant is brother of the deceased. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of the appellant. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record especially the impugned judgment and award. 4. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that he was only dependent on the income of the deceased. At the time of accident, he was only 15-16 years of age and nobody was there to maintain him and hence, award should be proportionately enhanced. 5. The Tribunal has held that present appellant is only brother of the deceased and he has admitted in his statement that now he is working and hence, looking to the fact that dependency of the present appellant on the deceased was only for 2-3 years. In such circumstances, award of Rs. 50,000/- has been passed. 6. The important factor in the appeal is that the appellant has claimed himself to be minor but, the claim petition before the Tribunal has not sound so. Nowhere in the claim petition it has been alleged that the claimant is minor and no evidence regarding age of the present appellant has been submitted before the Tribunal. Hence, looking to the totality of the circumstances, there is no need to interfere in the award passed by the Tribunal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.