Sukhram vs Shelbem

Sachin Singh Rajput, J

This appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short Act of 1988) has been filed by the appellants / claimants being aggrieved by the award dated 16/10/2018 passed by the VIII Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in M.A.C.C.No. 152/2016.

By the impugned award, against the claim of Rs. 23,60,000/-, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 09,37,200/- on account of death of their son Deepak Dhurwey in an accident that occurred on 18/04/2015 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. KA-22/A-7288 by respondent No. 1 / driver, owned by respondent No.2/Owner and Insured by respondent No.3/Insurance Company.

An application under section 166 of Act of 1988 was filed by the applicants/claimants inter-alia pleading that the deceased was aged about 20 years at the time of accident. He was earning Rs.20,000/- per month working in the boring machine.

The application was resisted by respondent No. 3 by filing it’s written statement and pleaded that there is a violation of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy.

The learned Tribunal framed four issues on the basis of above broad pleadings and decided the same in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded the above stated compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submits that the amount of the compensation is on lower side which requires suitable enhancement may be made by this Court in order to to make compensation just.

Learned counsel for the respondents No.3 supports the award and submits that just compensation is awarded. no disability certificate was filed even no treating doctor or any other doctor were examined and the bills of treatment which were produced by the appellant / claimant were duly considered. the learned Tribunal has considered all aspects of the matter and awarded just compensation under all admissible heads.

Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submission and also perused the record with utmost circumspection.

After perusal of the records, it appears that the incident had occurred on 18/04/2015, deceased was aged about 20 years. Though a Claim was made that the deceased was involved in the activities of Boring digging and was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, however no documentary evidence on record was produced. The Tribunal found the monthly income of the deceased to Rs.6000/- and considering the evidence on record, date of accident which does not appear to be on lower side. Tribunal has also added 40% future prospects and deducted one half for the personal expenses, thereby awarded Rs.09,07,200/- as loss of dependency and further awarded Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses, relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Smt. Sarla Verma and others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2, (2009) 6 SCC 121. This finding doesn’t appears to be contrary to the evidence available on record. However, the Tribunal failed to award any filial compensation in light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130. Therefore, this Court awards Rs.40,000/- each to the appellant No.1 and 2 total of Rs.80,000/- in addition to the amount already awarded by the learned Tribunal. Needless to say it shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing appeal i.e. 05/11/2019 to be deposited by the respondent No. 3/Insurance Company within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Appeal thus partly allowed with modification in the award impugned to the above extent.