Ismail Khan and Another vs Brij Narayan and Another

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

The impugned award dated 10.03.2004 passed by the Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, Surguja in claim case No. 76/2003 ahs given rise to filing of these two appeals i.e. MA No.554/2004 and MA No. 1094/2005. MA No.554/2004 has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas the other MA No. 1094/2005 has been filed by the owner of the offending vehicle against the impugned award holding him liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

As against the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- Claimed by the claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased girl Kum. Shama aged about four years by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor vehicles Act for her death in the motor accident on 13.02.2003 The Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.54,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum form the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that claimants'' daughter Kum Shama died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 13.02.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle tractor-trolley bearing registration No.CG-15/A/0323 and CG-15/A0325 respectively; though the above offending vehicles tractor-trolley were insured on the date of the accident with the United India Insurance Company limited, as the driver of the tractor- trolley was not holding any driving license, the insurance Company was entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the owner of the tractor-trolley

The Tribunal considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including the age of the claimants'' daughter awarded lump sum of Rs. 50,000/ - as compensation; Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,000/- for loss of estate. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of 54,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their daughter Kum shama in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 54,500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.54,500/-only.

Shri DN Prajapati and Shri Mohd Tariq, learned counsel for the owner of the tractor-trolley on the other hand submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding the insurer of the tractor-trolley entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the owner of the tractor-trolley.

Shri Dasarath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the United India Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that as the driver of the tractor-trolley was not holding any license at all at the time of the accident, the Tribunal has rightly held the insurer of the tractor-trolley entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the owner and driver of the tractor-trolley.

So far as the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the same, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Syed Ibrahim and others reported in 2007 (4) T.A.C. 386 (S.C.) does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. The Apex Court in the above case held the compensation for the death of a child aged about 7 years in the motor accident. In the present case also considering that the claimants'' daughter Kum Shama was aged about four years only, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.54,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

So far as the liability of the owner and driver of the tractor-trolley is concerned, we gather from para-9 of the impugned award that Brij Narayan, who was driving the tractor-trolley at the time of the accident had a learning license which was issued on 26.05.1999 and was valid upto 25.11.1999 only. The unfortunate accident wherein claimants'' Daughter Kum Sharma lost her life took place on 13.02.2003. It appears that after the expiry of the learning license on 25.11.1999, for the first time the learning license was got renewed on 032.03.2003 i.e. much after the date of the accident on 13.02.2003. Thus, it is apparent that on the date of the accident i.e. 13.02.2003, Brij Narayan was not holding any license at all. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the finding recorded by the Tribunal holding the insurer of the tractor-trolley entitled to recover the amount of compensation form the driver and owner of the tractor-trolley.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for respondent No.3 The United India Insurance Company Limited pointed out that in fact, the insurer of the tractor-trolley has already recovered the amount from the owner of the tractor-trolley.

For the foregoing reasons, both the appeals i.e. MA No.554/2004 filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation and MA No. 1094/ 2005 filed by the owner of the tractor-trolley against the award are liable to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed.