Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 239 (MP)

Dilip v. Raahbhai

2019-03-15

ROHIT ARYA

body2019
ORDER 1. The miscellaneous appeal under section 173(I) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act')is directed against the award dated 27.1.2017 passed in claim case No. 115/2014 by Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Alirajpur. 2. Facts relevant and necessary for disposal of this appeal lie in narrow compass: on 14.6.2014, the deceased (Nanki, a minor ) going from village Kalikhetar to Village Amreli in Toofan Jeep alongwith her family members met with an accident near Sojatra Aanad Road as the Container Truck bearing No. GJ 07 YY 1798 rashly and negligently driven by respondent No. 1 hit the Toofan Jeep, as a result, the deceased suffered grievous injuries on various parts of the body and died on the spot. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claimant submits that at the time of incident, the deceased was six years of age. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed illegality fixing income of the deceased as Rs. 15,000/-(notional income). The Hon'ble Supreme Court for the death of child of 10 years died in the accident occurred in the year 1992 has assessed notional income as Rs. 30,000/- p.a.in the case of Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and ors, reported in 2013 ACJ 2594 . Hence, the finding in that behalf deserves to be set aside and just compensation be awarded. 4. The claimants/appellants have challenged the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the premise that the compensation awarded is meager and on the lower side on various heads and even future prospects of the deceased have not been awarded appropriately. Hence, the compensation has to be enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has supported the impugned award. On merits, it is submitted that looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and no enhancement is called for. Hence the liability is not disputed. Accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. It is established from the material available on record that the accident took place by the offending vehicle and the offending vehicle was duly insured with the respondent /Insurance Company. The deceased suffered grievous injuries in the accident in question and died on the spot. 7. The moot question to be addressed upon in the appeal preferred by the claimants is as to whether the tribunal was justified awarding Rs. The deceased suffered grievous injuries in the accident in question and died on the spot. 7. The moot question to be addressed upon in the appeal preferred by the claimants is as to whether the tribunal was justified awarding Rs. 2,25,000 towards loss of income, Rs. 50,000/- Love and Affection and others.; total compensation of Rs. 2,75,000/-. 8. Having gone through the impugned award and looking to the fact that deceased was a minor; aged 6 years on the date of accident and the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra), loss of earning/dependency have not been assessed properly. Hence, in the opinion of this Court, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced appropriately. 9. The finding of the Tribunal as regards earning of the appellant is incorrect. Therefore, the finding as regards earning of the appellant is unreasonable. In the obtaining facts and circumstances, the earning of deceased is assessed as Rs. 30,000/- p.a. The multiplier 15' is appropriate multiplier. 10. This Court is of the view that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal deserves to be enhanced as follows:- Loss of Income (Income Rs. 30,000/- x 15) Rs. 4,50,000/- Other heads (Love and Affection and Others) Rs. 20,000/- Total Rs. 4,70,000/- 11. As such, the appellant is entitled for Rs. 1,95,000/- (Rupees One Lac Ninety Five Thousand only) over and above the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal i.e. from Rs. 2,75,000/- to Rs. 4,70,000/- with interest as fixed by the Tribunal which is ordered accordingly to be payable to the appellant as directed by the Tribunal in the same apportionment. The enhanced amount of compensation Rs. 1,95,000/- shall be payable to the appellants within 12 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Rest of the award impugned passed by the Tribunal shall remain intact. 12. If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the valuation of appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid) shall be deposited by the appellant within four weeks' from today and proof thereof shall be submitted before the Registry. Thereafter Registry shall issue the certified copy of the order passed today. 13. With the aforesaid, appeal stands disposed of. ................