Lal Sai Nand vs Ravi Kumar Sethi And Ors

Gautam Chourdiya, J

This appeal is by non-applicant No.4 Lalsai Nand, father of the deceased, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award

25.9.2014 passed by III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No.13/2013 awarding total compensation of Rs.4,87,500/-

with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization, fastening liability on the non- applicants jointly and severally.

As per claim petition, on 25.9.2012 deceased Anish Kumar Nand, 26 years, earning Rs.40,000/- per annum as a mason, was riding motorcycle

bearing No. CG 04 CH 0647. However, non-applicant No.1 Ravi Kumar Sethi by driving truck bearing No. CG 04 JC 8225 in a rash and negligent

manner, dashed the said motorcycle, as a result of which Anish Kumar Nand suffered grievous injuries and died on the spot itself. At the time of

accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non- applicant No.2 and insured with non-applicant No.3.

On claim petition being filed by the claimant, wife of the deceased, under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act wherein father of the deceased

Lalsai Nand, appellant herein, was impleaded as non- applicant No.4, the Tribunal considering the evidence led by both the parties passed an award as

mentioned above.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that at the time of filing of claim petition, the appellant was 69 years of age and due to old age and

certain physical ailments he could not appear before the Tribunal. Though he was impleaded as non-applicant No.4 in the claim petition but the

Tribunal without considering the fact that as per claim petition itself, wife of the appellant has already died, the appellant is old aged, awarded the

entire amount in favour of the claimant, wife of the deceased. Therefore, he submits that looking to the age of the appellant and the fact that there is

no one to take care of him, he was totally dependent upon his son/deceased, 30% of the awarded amount may be granted in favour of the appellant.

Learned counsel for the respondent/insurance company has duly assisted the Court.

No counter appeal has been filed by the respondents as submitted by learned counsel for the parties.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

In this appeal, notice was served upon respondent No.4 Smt. Shailendri Nand, wife of the deceased, by way of substituted service through paper

publication. However, none appears on behalf of respondent No.4. In the affidavit filed by the appellant in support of application for substituted

service, his age is mentioned as 69 years. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the age of the appellant, the

fact that his wife has already died, no one is there to look after him as submitted by counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the opinion that it would

be just and proper to grant him 15% out of the amount of Rs.4,87,500/- awarded by the Tribunal in favour of the claimant/wife of the deceased, which

comes to Rs.73,125/-.

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is held entitled for a sum of Rs.73,125/- out of the amount awarded by the Tribunal in

favour of the claimant/wife of the deceased. The award impugned stands modified to the above extent. However, rest of the conditions of the award

shall remain intact.