This appeal arises out of a judgment and award rendered by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Surendranagar in MACP No.386 of 2002 on 06/10/2004. The said claim petition was preferred by respondents No.1 and 2 herein for the death of their son, Shailesh aged 18 years. Shailesh met with an accident on 21/03/2002 at 07:30 a.m., while he was travelling in rickshaw bearing Registration No.GJ-4U-9611. As per the case of the claimants, the deceased was travelling in the said rickshaw alongwith luggage. The rickshaw was being driven in such a rash manner, that the deceased was flung out of the rickshaw and, after he fell on the ground, his head was crushed under the rear wheel of the rickshaw. The said rickshaw was insured with the appellant. The claimants had claimed an amount of Rs.3 Lacs. The Tribunal awarded Rs.2,28,000/- as compensation with interest @ 9% with proportionate costs and hence this appeal. 2. Learned Advocate Mr.Rajni H Mehta appearing for Mr.Parikh for the appellant tried to assail the judgment and award on various hyper technical grounds which have bearing not on law but on facts.
3. The appeal is opposed to by learned Advocate Mr.Sejpal appearing for respondents No.1 and 2, the original claimants, and learned Advocate Mr.Dave appearing for respondent No.3, original owner cum driver of the vehicle in question.
4. Having heard learned Advocates for parties, at the outset, it may be recorded that the factum of accident; involvement of the vehicle in the accident; the negligence on part of respondent No.3 and, its quantum, the demise of Shailesh on account of accidental injury and his age, are not in dispute.
5. It appears that deceased - Shailesh was the only son of the original claimants, who was aged 18 years and was working as a crafts-man-cum-delivery boy. According to the claimant, he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. However, in absence of documentary evidence, the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.1,200/- per month and prospective income at Rs.1,800/- per month. Dependency was assessed at Rs.1,200/- considering 1/3 of the income, as the amount spent by the deceased on his own self and, adopting a multiplier of 15 the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- under the head of dependency loss. The Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- as conventional amount and Rs.2,000/- as expenditure on obsequial ceremony, totalling Rs.2,18,000/- as compensation to the claimants.
6. Having gone through the evidence and the judgment of the Tribunal, it has to be recorded that the assessment of income made by the Tribunal, in respect of the deceased cannot be said to be on higher side, in any manner. The multiplier is also very conservatively adopted and, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the Tribunal cannot be said to have committed an error in awarding Rs.2,16,000/- as compensation under the head of loss of dependency. The rest of the amounts are also very conservatively assessed, probably keeping tune with the time around which the accident occurred. In any event, the claimants have not preferred an appeal and the appeal by the Insurance Company, for the foregoing reasons, does not merit acceptance. The appeal must fail and stands dismissed, with no order as to costs.
7. The amount, if any, deposited with the Registry and not transmitted uptil now, will be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement as per the award of the Tribunal.
(A L DAVE, J.) sompura