1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellant herein has challenged the award dated 02.01.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 412 of 2004 so far as the Tribunal awarded only Rs. 2,34,900/- as compensation with interest and costs.
3. It is the case of the appellants that on 12.05.2004 while Shri Kalubhai @ Jagdishbhai was riding his motorcycle bearing registration no. GJ-5 AQ 651, truck bearing registration no. GJ-11-T-9696 being driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner dashed with the motorcycle as a result of which Shri Kalubhai sustained injuries on various parts of the body and finally succumbed to the same. The appellants, being the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased therefore filed claim petition to the tune of Rs. 6,00,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Mr. Mehta, learned advocate appearing for Mr. Shah for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration the entire facts of the case and evidence on record and thereby erred in awarding adequate amount under various heads. He submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased and the multiplier.
5. The Tribunal in the present case has borne in mind that claim under section 163-A is based on No Fault Liability and hence proof of negligence of owner of the vehicle or any other person is not required for a claim under section 163A. The requirements are (I) age of victim; (ii) fact of accident by use of motor vehicle; (iii) fatal or injury causing permanent or partial disability; (iv) income of victim; (v) name of owner of vehicle with its number and name of insurer.
5.1 This court is of the opinion that the Tribunal has considered the aforesaid aspects of the matter. The Tribunal has specifically considered the age and income of the deceased and as per the schedule arrived at a figure of Rs. 345600/-. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal and therefore do not see any reason for causing interference. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view.
6. In the premises aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//