AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice K.S. Jhaveri
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 13.07.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.),
Kachchh at Bhuj in M.A.C.P. No.110/2002 filed u/s. 163-A of the M.V. Act whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and respondents
no.1 to 6, original claimants, were awarded total compensation of Rs.3,69,500/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of
application till its realization and proportionate costs.
The facts in brief are that on 02.01.2002 at about 1830 hrs. Abdul Fakirmammad Chhathiya was driving the Truck loaded with goods bearing
registration no. GJ-12T-9149, owned by respondent no.8, insured with respondent no.9-Insurance Company and was going towards Porbandar.
During that time, an ST bus bearing registration no. GJ-18V-5585 belonging to the appellant-Corporation came from the opposite direction and
dashed the said Truck. As a result of the said accident, Abdul Chhatiya sustained severe bodily injuries and ultimately, died. His legal heirs filed the
claim petition before the Tribunal, which came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Hence, this appeal.
Heard Learned Counsel for the respective parties. The appellant- Insurance Company has assailed the impugned award only qua the quantum
of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. It has been submitted that the Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper
perspective and has committed serious error in awarding Rs.3,69,500/- as compensation.
The impugned award has been passed on an application filed u/s. 163-A of the M.V. Act. Therefore, this Court is not required to look into the
aspect of negligence in the present proceeding. It appears that before the Tribunal the original claimants had not produced any documentary
evidence to prove the income of the deceased. However, it is an admitted fact that the deceased was working as Driver of the Truck bearing
registration no. GJ-12T-9149 and therefore, the Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs.3,000/-. Considering the facts of the case and since
the deceased was aged about 36 years at the time of accident as per the PM Report, the Tribunal awarded Rs.3,60,000/- under the head of loss
of dependency as per the Second Schedule. In my opinion, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is legal and appropriate and hence, I
find no reasons to disturb the same.
For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.