Court No. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 526 of 2000 Appellant :- U.P.S.R.T.C. And Another Respondent :- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Agra And Others Counsel for Appellant :- M.M.Sahai Counsel for Respondent :- A.C. Nigam,J.S. Baghel
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri M.M. Sahai, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri A.C. Nigam, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the judgment and order impugned. None appeared on behalf of respondent-claimants.
2. This appeal, at the behest of the U.P.S.R.T.C., challenges the judgment and award dated 12.1.2000 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Judge, Mainpuri (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No.57 of 1995 awarding a sum of Rs.1,92,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% as compensation against the appellant.
3. Submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has awarded compensation which is on the higher side. It is further submitted that the income of the injured was not proved before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has considered the income of the injured Rs.1500/- per month. He was 100% disabled. The Tribunal unfortunately deducted 1/3rd as it applied the principle applicable for deceased and by applying multiplier of 16, it has assessed the total compensation to be Rs.1,92,000/-.
4. While recalculating the amount, can it be said that a person who was 35 years of age and who had five dependents and was doing his business of agriculture, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side? The answer would be, No as even in the year of accident, if his income was considered to be Rs.1500/-, 1/3rd should not have been deducted. On the contrary, as per the decision in Syed. Sadiq and others Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, (2014) 2 SCC 735, certain amount could have been added as future loss of income.
5. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any reason to accept the submissions of the counsel for the appellant, hence, the appeal is dismissed. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith.
6. This Court is thankful to Sri M.M. Sahai and Sri A.C. Nigam, learned counsel for the parties for ably assisting the Court and getting this old matter disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 DKS