Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2390 (ALL)

United India Insurance v. Babu Khan

2013-09-24

BHARATI SAPRU

body2013
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Bharati Sapru, J.—Heard learned counsel for the appellant Insurance company and the learned counsel for the claimant. 2. I have also perused the material on record. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal dated 12.7.1999 in M.A.C.T. No. 236 of 1994 by which the appellant has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 70,000/- with 10% interest to the claimant. 3. The claimant in this case are the parents of a 14 years old boy who met with an accident on 12.3.1994. It was one day before the festival of Idd, the boy Babu Khan aged about 14 years who was going to a local market to buy himself a pair of shoes. Little did he know that he would not even able to wear the shoes that he had bought for the festival. On his way back, he was crushed to death by a scooterist. 4. The tribunal has recorded a clear finding that the child died due to rash and negligent driving of scooter driver. The scooter was covered by the insurance company and it has also been recorded that the licence of the scooter licence was there. 5. The Insurance company of course denies that the driving licence was valid but has not been able to produce any material to show and on the other hand, even though it took plea before the tribunal that the driving licence was not valid one, it failed to substantiate itself the plea by way of filing any evidence or by way of seeking any discoveries or interrogatories with regard to the driving licence. As such they literally acquiesced in the matter. 6. The amount of Rs. 70,000/- as awarded to the claimant is very petty. There is no doubt in the mind of this Court that the loss of 14 years of a child cannot in any manner be compensated in terms of money in the least a sum of Rs. 70,000/-. 7. The emotional loss to the parents is grievous and in so far as the financial loss is concerned that too is grievous because had the child been allowed to live a full life, the child would have supported his parents in their old age. 70,000/-. 7. The emotional loss to the parents is grievous and in so far as the financial loss is concerned that too is grievous because had the child been allowed to live a full life, the child would have supported his parents in their old age. This is a natural reversal role which is experienced in Indian culture and tradition that the old parents are kept and taken care of by their children. To say that the parents are not dependent, is not correct because the older the parents grow, the greater is the dependency, especially in terms of physical comfort and support and emotional support and the deprivation of this at the time when it is most needed, is indeed a grievous loss. 8. Learned counsel for the Insurance company has sought to argue that if fault would have been put on the scooterist, then the liability should have been fixed on the scooter owner. However the record reflects that the scooter was insured and the driving licence was found to be valid on the date of the accident. Thus it is not open to the Insurance company to shift the liability on the scooter owner. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, I am of the opinion that the order passed by the tribunal requires no rectification by this Court. It is confirmed. The amount is very meagre but since no cross objection for enhancement is made, it shall remain the same amount. The amount deposited shall be released to the claimants forthwith. 10. The appeal is disposed of as above. No costs.