AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By means of this appeal the impugned judgment and order dated 16.9.2016 rendered by the District Judge, Rudraprayag is under challenge by the Insurance Company.
The accident occurred on 27.4.2015 at around 6:05 AM somewhere between Rishikesh to Devprayag when a youth, aged about 18 years, namely Shri Ankit Rawat was traveling in the pickup no. UK07CC-2651. He was bringing his milk from Rishikesh onwards and used to work as an Assistant in the shop of proprietor Vishal Traders Badrinath road, Srinagar Garhwal to earn Rs. 8,000/- per month as pleaded by the unfortunate parents of the deceased. The pickup swerved from the road and fell in the deep gorge. Mr. Ankit Rawat was seriously injured. He was shifted from one hospital to other and ultimately lost his life within a day or two of such accident.
Compensation petition no. 7/2015 was presented by his parents asking the amount of Rs. 25 lakhs from the insurer of the pickup which was insured for the unlimited liability at least for two persons who were traveling in such vehicle including the driver, whereagainst, learned Tribunal has granted the compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,52,000/- along with 6% interest from the date of institution of the petition to that of actual payment.
Learned counsel of the appellant has drawn the attention of this court towards the report of their own Investigator that at the relevant date and time three persons were traveling in the vehicle including the driver, but such report could not be proved before the Tribunal so that the claimants counsel could have an opportunity to cross examine the Investigator. In that way the report cannot be relied as such.
That apart, the presence of Master Ankit Rawat in the vehicle has also been depicted in the report of the Investigator and it has also been found that he was carrying the curd and milk in such vehicle, so, he was traveling in the vehicle as the custodian of the goods so transported.
Insurance cover has not been disputed for unlimited liabilities. The multiplier on the average age of the parents has been applied. I do not find any infirmity in choosing the multiplier by the learned presiding officer of the court below but, at the same time considering the amount of compensation quite less, I find that something should be awarded by the Tribunal towards the loss of estate, love and affection and cremation etc. to make it just and proper compensation. So, this court in exercise of the powers vested under Order 41 Rule 33 of the CPC grants the following amount in addition to what has been awarded by the learned Tribunal:
Rs. 25,000/- towards the cremation.
Rs. 50,000/- towards the loss of estate.
Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the love and affection of the alone son of the ill fated parents.
This way the amount comes to Rs. 4,27,000/- 7. This appeal is hereby dismissed but the award is modified to the tune of Rs. 4,27,000/- which shall also earn the interest of 7.5% from the date of institution of the petition till the amount is actually paid by the Insurance Company.
The amount shall be disbursed to the party. Compulsory statutory deposit shall be remitted to the Tribunal.