Reserved on 24.5.2019 Delivered on 31.5.2019
Court No. - 3
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 112 of 2000 Appellant :- Mohd. Salman @ Shekhu and Another Respondent :- Kuldeep Singh Counsel for Appellant :- Sharve Singh Counsel for Respondent :-Siddartha Jaiswal
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Sharve Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Siddarth Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 22.9.1999 passed by XII Additional District Judge/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Allahabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.353 of 1997 awarding a sum of Rs.76,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% for the death of 10 year old child.
3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence was decided in favour of the appellant herein. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them by the Tribunal. The only issue to be decided is the quantum.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the award is bad and relied on decision of this Court and Apex Court in Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others, 2013 (101) ALR 281 (SC) = 2013 (131) AIC 219 = 2014 (1) AICC 208 (SC) and Manju Devi's case, 2005 (1) TAC 609 = 2005 AICC 208 (SC) relied by this Court in its recent decision of this Court in United India Insurance Company Limited. Vs. Mumtaz Ahmad and Another, 2017 (2) AICC 1229 wherein 2 this Court held as follows:
"6. Sri Ram Singh has heavily relied on the decision in the case of Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others, 2013 (101) ALR 281
(SC) = 2013 (131) AIC 219 = 2014 (1) AICC 208
(SC) and Manju Devi's case, 2005 (1) TAC 609
= 2005 AICC 208 (SC). It goes without saying the notional figure fixed by the Apex Court since Manju Devi's judgment has been consistently Rs.2,25,000 for children below the age of 15 years. I think that is just and proper and hence, the amount requires to be enhanced from Rs.1,57,000 to Rs.2,25,000 with 6% be recovered from the owner. The appeal is partly allowed. The cross-objection is also partly allowed."
5. The judgment of Kisan Gopal (Supra) cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case as in this case the apex court did not deduct any amount towards personal expenses. Under all the heads, the judgment of Mumtaz Ahmad (Supra) is applicable to the facts of this case, hence, the award is required to be enhanced and is enhanced to Rs.2,25,000/-.
6. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The amount be deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till award and 6% thereafter till the amount is deposited. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 DKS