By way of filing this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 27th February, 1998 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Nadiad at Kheda in MAC Petition No.637 of 1986 whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,07,000/- to the claimants as against their claim of Rs.1,75,000.
2 The short facts of the present appeal are that incident happened on 16/01/1986. Deceased Vallavbhai had gone to Ahmedabad and was returning in Matador Tempo No.GTJ 7265. At that time on Anand - Borsad Road, cross-roads, the luxury bus No.NHT 251 was driven by opponent No.4, which was of the ownership of opponent No.5 and insured with opponent No.6, in a rash and negligent manner and without sounding horn or using dipper dashed with the tempo GTJ 7265 driven by opponent No.1, which was of the ownership of opponent No.2 and it was insured with opponent No.3 - insurance company, causing serious injuries. Appellant No.1 is the widow of the deceased, Nos.2 to 5 are the sons and daughters of the deceased and applicant No.1, who are now major. Appellants Nos.6 and 7 are the parents of the deceased who died during the pendency of the claim petition and are deleted.
3. The Tribunal having considered the submissions, has granted amount of compensation wherein Rs.7200/- towards economic loss, Rs.20,000/- for expectation of life; Rs.10,000/- for consortium and Rs.5,000/- for funeral and in all the appellant is entitled to recover Rs.1,07,000/- .
4. The claimant has deleted the owner and driver of the other vehicle in view of the order passed by the Court. Therefore, the insurance company No.6 will not be held liable.
5. Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed an error and has wrongly deducted Rs.3,000/-. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that looking to the age of the deceased, amount under the head of economic loss requires to be increased.
6. However, keeping in mind the decision as referred herein above and the decision of the Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Coporation & Another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 the applicant is entitled to additional amount of Rs.17,550/- under the head of economic loss of income from the opponent No.3. However, looking to the judgment of this Hon'ble Court as cited by the learned Advocate for the appellant, the amount of pain, shock and suffering is just and proper and no interference is required to be made. Therefore, the claimants would be entitled to additional amount of Rs.17,550/- from opponent No.3 under the head of economic loss of income. Thus, the claimant is entitled to get additional amount of Rs.17,550/- from opponent No.3 along with interest at the rate of 7½ % per annum from the date of application till the date of realisation.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the judgment and order dated 27th February, 1998 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Nadiad at Kheda in MAC Petition No.637 of 1986 whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,07,000/- is modified and the claimants are now entitled to Rs.1,24,550/-
under the head of economic loss from opponent No.3. Thus, the claimants are entitled to get additional amount of Rs.17,550/- from opponent No.3 along with interest at the rate of 7½ % per annum from the date of application till the date of realisation. Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. Opponent No.6 is not liable to make any payment.
(K.S.Jhaveri, J.) sompura Top