JUDGMENT : PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the appellant-National Insurance Company challenging the judgment/award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Ranchi in Accident Claim Case No. 307 of 2014, whereby and whereunder, learned trial has pleased to pass the award of Rs.8,76,800/- as compensation amount in favour of the sole applicant Rubana Parween on account of death of her husband arising out of motor vehicle accident without giving right of recovery to the appellant-Insurance Company due to violation of terms and conditions of the policy. 3. The crux of the argument of learned counsel for the appellant is as under: (i) As per FIR and the charge-sheet submitted in this case, the accident took place due to collision between two vehicles as such it is a case of contributory negligence and this aspect of the matter has been ignored by learned trial court. (ii) The owner of the vehicle/or the claimant had not produced road permit of the vehicle, which shows that it was being plied without valid permit which amounts to gross violation of terms and conditions of the policy. (iii) There is no documentary evidence, proving that the monthly income of the deceased was of Rs.4,500/- and there is no proof of age of the deceased except post-mortem report. Therefore, the impugned award is fit to be set aside allowing this appeal. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 has refuted the aforesaid contentions raised on behalf of the appellant and submitted that this appeal is based on frivolous and flimsy grounds. There was no question of contributory negligence as has been properly decided by the learned Trial Court while deciding the issue No. 4. It has been further submitted that the matter of violation of any terms and conditions of the policy was never raised by the appellant during the trial and the findings of the learned trial court has become final. Therefore, there is no merits in this appeal, which is fit to be dismissed. 5. It appears from Vide order dated 27.03.2023 that notice issued to the respondent No. 2 has been returned with report to the effect that he has been died since long, but no prayer for substitution of the legal representative of the respondent No. 2 has been made as yet. 5. It appears from Vide order dated 27.03.2023 that notice issued to the respondent No. 2 has been returned with report to the effect that he has been died since long, but no prayer for substitution of the legal representative of the respondent No. 2 has been made as yet. Under such circumstances, this appeal was abated against the respondent No. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 6. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 08.11.2014, one Md. Azad was going to his Sasural situated at village Taranga, P.S. Chanho riding on his motorcycle bearing Reg. No. JH-01AQ-0920 along with his nephew namely Md. Mozamil Khan as a pillion rider. When they reached near Brambey at NH 75 at about 3:00 pm, the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 driven very rashly and negligently by its driver coming from opposite direction Mandar side dashed in the motorcycle of the Md. Aalm causing his instantaneous death and serious injuries to pillion rider namely Mozamil Khan, who was referred to Madi Hospital, Ranchi for treatment. In connection with the said accident, Mandar P.S. Case No. 121 of 2014 dated 08.11.2014 was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304A of IPC. Autopsy of dead body was conducted at RIMS, Ranchi and post-mortem report was submitted. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the driver of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926. 7. It is alleged that on the date of accident the deceased was aged about 28 years and getting salary of Rs.4,500/- per month and working as a daily wages labour in the department of Surgery RIMS, Ranchi. Due to sudden demise in road accident, the applicant has been deprived from the livelihood and suffered mental, shock and agony. 8. The sole claimant, who is the wife of the deceased, has claimed Rs.5 lakhs as compensation with interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of filing the application till its realization. Inspite of valid service of summons to the owner of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 namely Ajay Kumar Khalkho did not appear, hence, the case was proceed ex-parte against him. 9. Inspite of valid service of summons to the owner of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 namely Ajay Kumar Khalkho did not appear, hence, the case was proceed ex-parte against him. 9. The appellant-National Insurance Company appeared and filed its written statement admitting that the vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 belonging to Ajay Kumar Khalkho was insured with appellant-Insurance Company vide Policy No. 170205/31/13/63/00002057 valid from the period of 01.12.2013 to mid-night 30.11.2014. It was further pleaded that there is head on collision between two vehicles, therefore, there is contributory negligence including the deceased himself. The amount of compensation as claimed is very excessive and exaggerate. The age, income and occupation of the deceased was not admitted and claimed to be proved strictly by the applicant/claimant. It was further pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle had vehemently violated the rules causing the alleged accident, for which the Insurance Company should not be made liable to pay the compensation amount. 10. On the basis of pleadings of the parties following issues were settled by learned Tribunal: (i) Whether the claim application as filed is maintainable? (ii) Whether applicants have valid cause of action for the case? (iii) Whether the death of the deceased namely Md. Alam resulted to the alleged vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926? (iv) Whether, there is contributory negligence of the deceased in causing the alleged accident, if yes to what extent? (v) Whether the insured/owner of the offending vehicle has violated terms and conditions of the insurance policy? (vi) Whether applicants are entitled for compensation as claimed, if yes, against whom and to what extent? (vii) To what relief or reliefs, if any, the applicants are entitled to? 11. In order to substantiate her case, the applicant has examined two witnesses namely AW-1 Rubana Parween (wife of deceased) and AW-2 Mozammil Khan (injured witness). Apart from the oral testimony of witness, following documentary evidence has been adduced: Ext.1 - Certified Copy of FIR vide mandar P.S. Case No. 131/2014, dated 08.11.2014 against the driver of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 for the offence under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of IPC. Apart from the oral testimony of witness, following documentary evidence has been adduced: Ext.1 - Certified Copy of FIR vide mandar P.S. Case No. 131/2014, dated 08.11.2014 against the driver of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 for the offence under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of IPC. Ext.2 - Certified copy of charge sheet vide Charge Sheet No. 09/15, dated 31.01.2015 against driver namely Ashok Kumar driving the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 for the offence under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of IPC. Ext.3 - Photo copy of Postmortem report of the deceased namely Md. Alam vide P.M. Report No. 2329/14, dated 09.11.14, RIMS, Ranchi. Ext.4 - Photo Copy of Certificate of Registration for the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 in the name of Ajay Kumar Khalkho, O.P. No. 1. Ext.-5 - Photo Copy of Insurance Policy for the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926 registered in the name of Ajay Kumar Khalkho, O.P. No. 1, issued by the O.P. No. 2, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vide policy No. 170205/31/13/63/00002057 valid for the period from 01.12.13 to 30.11.14. 12. Issue Nos.3 and 4 are corresponding with the factual aspect of the case, which has been made the first ground of this appeal by the appellant and in this regard, learned trial court by taking both issues together for adjudication and after examining the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the claimants and also in view of the fact that no evidence has been adduced in rebuttal of the evidence of the claimant, recorded findings that the death of the deceased namely Md. Alam resulted due to alleged vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving by its driver and contributory negligence on the part of the deceased has not been substantiated on the basis of materials available on record. Therefore, both issues have been decided in favour of the applicants and against the opposite parties. Accordingly 1st ground as raised by the appellant for this appeal is not justified under law. 13. So far second grounds, the appeal is concerned, it is corresponding to the issue No. 5 which pertains to the violation of terms and conditions of the policy. Accordingly 1st ground as raised by the appellant for this appeal is not justified under law. 13. So far second grounds, the appeal is concerned, it is corresponding to the issue No. 5 which pertains to the violation of terms and conditions of the policy. In this regard, it is admitted position that no written statement was filed by the owner of the vehicle, who did not appear to face the trial and the appellant-National Insurance Company has brought nothing on record in specific terms to prove any violation of terms and conditions of the policy, which may entitle to the appellant-Insurance Company for right of recovery. Even no investigation report of the Insurance Company regarding any violation of terms and conditions of the policy has been brought on record or proved to establish any violation of terms and conditions of the policy. Therefore, the plea taken by the appellant for the first time that permit was not filed of the offending vehicle can not accepted. 14. In the accident case, the appellant has claimed contributory negligence simply on account of collision between two vehicles but no evidence has been brought on record showing any negligence on the part of the deceased driver of the motorcycle, which has contributed in the happening of the alleged accident. It is clearly proved by oral as well as documentary evidence produced by the claimants that the accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle Citi Ride Bus bearing Reg. No. JH-01AD-1926. 15. So far quantum of compensation is concerned, which is the third ground of the appeal, the appellant-Insurance Company has not rebutted evidence of the claimants as regards age and occupation as well as income of the deceased, who was working as labour earning of Rs.4,500/- per month. The accident is of the year 2014 and learned Tribunal has rightly observed about no requirement of any documentary evidence for establishing earning of casual labour and it is not disputed that in the year 2014 the monthly income of a casual labour can not be Rs.4,500/-per month i.e. Rs.150 per day. The accident is of the year 2014 and learned Tribunal has rightly observed about no requirement of any documentary evidence for establishing earning of casual labour and it is not disputed that in the year 2014 the monthly income of a casual labour can not be Rs.4,500/-per month i.e. Rs.150 per day. Accordingly, the learned trial court applying the 40% future prospect, 1/3rd deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased and multiplier by 17 applicable as per principles led down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and Ors. vs. DTC and Ors. (2009) 6 SCC 121 and also adding the general damages propounded in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680 has rightly calculated the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.9,26,800/- and after deducting the interim award of Rs.50,000/- directed the Insurance Company to pay the claimant the amount of Rs.8,76,800/- along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of admission of claim application i.e. on 26.02.2015 till its realization. 16. It appears that as per direction of this Court vide order dated 27.03.2023 passed in I.A. No. 2734 of 2023. Proceeding of the execution Case No. 56 of 2022 was directed to be stayed subject to deposit of the entire award amount along with simple interest @ 9% per annum with the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Ranchi. The above order was also complied with by the appellant-Insurance Company. 17. In view of the above discussions and reasons, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment/award and no legal substance in the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, hence, this appeal is dismissed. 18. Stay of the Execution Case No. 56 of 2022 pending before the Presiding Officer of the Motor Vehicle Accident Tribunal, Ranchi arising out of the Motor Accident Claim Case No. 307 of 2014 is hereby vacated. 19. Pending I.As. if any, are disposed off accordingly. 20. Statutory amount deposited by the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company at the time of filing this appeal shall be returned to the appellant. 21. Let the copy of this order be sent back to the court below for information and needful.