Court No. - 27
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1167 of 1994 Appellant :- Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Respondent :- Ramji Singh & Another Counsel for Appellant :- R.P. Goel,Manish Goyal Counsel for Respondent :- V.B.L. Srivastava,A.K. Pandey
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Heard Sri S.K. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Sri A.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the claimant.
Facts of the present case in nutshell are that on 11.5.1988, the driver of mini Bus (bearing registration no. WMR 6102), driving rashly and negligently dashed the motor cycle of one Kunwar Bahadur Singh alias Tuntun from behind near village Haripur on Sheetal Dawani Marg (Seth Cold Storage). On account of severe injuries received in the accident, the deceased passed away after 6-7 hours. The deceased was 27 year old person holding diploma in mechanical engineering.
The claimants filed claim petition (bearing M.A.C.P. No. 67 of 1988). The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,26,800/- with 10 per cent rate of interest.
It is an admitted position of fact that the accident took place on 11.5.1988 ,i.e., when the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was enforced. It was a petition under Section 92-A read with Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The main contention raised by the Insurance Company is that the Tribunal has granted Rs.2,26,800/- with 10 per cent rate of interest.
I have read the counter affidavit filed by Sri A.K. Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of the claimants. It is submitted that the Tribunal has erred in applying multiplier as the pay of the deceased, who was 25 years of age at the time of accident, has been considered on the basis of Minimum Wages Act in stead of Rs.3000/- per mensem. Be that as it may, the Tribunal has considered his income to be Rs.8000/- which, according to Mr. A.K.Pandey is much on the lower side.
While going through the record, it is very much clear that the deceased was diploma holder in Mechanical Engineering. His income was more than Rs.810/-. The deduction and multiplier though are in the realm of the factum of being in commensurate with the Judgment of the Apex Court, the Tribunal again deducted Rs.1,13,000/- which means that the multiplier of 17 has already been applied and at the end has awarded a sum of Rs.2,26,800/-. Unfortunately, the Tribunal also fell into error in not considering the future income and any amount under the non-pecuniary heads. Be that as it may, the impugned award cannot be said unjust. I do not find any reason to interfere with the award of the Tribunal. Of course, normal rate of interest is Rs.9000/- but for the reasons stated above, neither any amount under the non-pecuniary head nor any amount under the head of the future income was granted.
The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly.
The amount, which is kept in fixed deposit, shall immediately be released in favour of the claimants as this is the matter of 1988.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Ram Murti