AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bhawani Singh, C.J.—This appeal is directed against award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Surendranagar, in M.A.C.P. No. 617 of 2001 dated October 16, 2004.
Shortly stated, accident took place on August 30, 2001 near S.T. Bus Stand, Surendranagar. Deceased was travelling by auto-rickshaws returning from Vadhwan to Surendranagar. Meanwhile, one chhakada rickshaw bearing Registration No. GJ-13-T-9498 driven by opponent No. 1 rashly and negligently hit auto-rickshaw. As a result, deceased suffered injury and died. She was 18 year-old, prosecuting studies and carrying on beauty parlour, earning Rs. 3,000-00 p.m. Accordingly, Rs. 5,00,000-00 are claimed.
Owner and driver appeared through Advocate but did not file written statement. Insurance Company has opposed claim vide written statement Exh. 15 denying averments made in claim petition and liability for payment of compensation. After receiving evidence and hearing parties, claim has been allowed to the extent of Rs. 2,41,000-00 with interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum from the .date of application till payment.
Shri P.V. Nanavati submits that compensation has not been assessed properly with the result, higher compensation has been awarded. This submission is opposed by Shri Vasavada by submitting that the deceased was 18 year-old, pursuing study and carrying on beauty parlour, earning Rs. 3,000-00 p.m. After completion of studies, she could get better job or progress in the beauty parlour, earn more income, assessment of compensation by Claims Tribunal has been properly done. It is found that 2/3rd has been deducted taking into consideration future marriage of deceased, thereby, reducing dependency of the claimants. Whether she would marry and when, there is no evidence. May be, she may not marry at all. Still, 2/3rd has been deducted. Submission for reduction of multiplier cannot be accepted since 2/3rd of compensation has already been deducted, therefore, further deduction of compensation by reduction of multiplier would lead to unjust assessment of compensation and benefiting tort-feasor. No further deduction is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Consequently, there is no merit in this appeal. Same is dismissed. Costs of this appeal shall be borne by the parties.
Compensation deposited be paid to the claimants immediately. Direct Service is permitted.