1. By way of this appeal, the appellant- Insurance Company has challenged the judgment and award dated 21.01.1998, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavnagar, in M.A.C.P. No.
366 of 1995, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 4,12,000/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 21.10.1994, the deceased was going on his motorcycle and when he was trying to overtake the truck going ahead of him, another truck came from opposite and dashed with the motorcycle of the deceased. As a result, the deceased sustained several injuries and died during the treatment. Therefore, legal heirs filed claim petition being M.A.C.P No. 366 of 1995, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavnagar for compensation.
2.1. The learned tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after recording the evidence decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the present appellant- Insurance Company.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the tribunal has not properly considered the evidence produced on record and submitted that the Tribunal ought to have held the truck was totally negligent for the accident. He has further contended that quantum of the award. He has further submitted that the interest awarded at the rate of 12% is on higher side.
4. Learned advocate for the respondents has supported the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submitted that no interference is called for.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record as well as the judgment and award of the tribunal. I am of the view that the Tribunal, after considering the evidence produced on record regarding the negligence and considering the fact that the deceased was trying to overtake the truck, has rightly held original opponent No.1 75% liable for the accident and the deceased 25% liable for the accident.
6. So far as the aspect of quantum is concerned, the Tribunal has considered the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- relying on the factory card. The Tribunal was also justified in deducting the dependency of Rs.600/- and adopting the multiplier of 18, considering the fact that the deceased was 23 years of age at the time of accident. The Tribunal was also completely justified in awarding the medical expenses, transportation charges, attendant charges and compensation under other heads.
7. In that view of the matter the tribunal has committed no error, and the award is just and proper. However, I am of the opinion that the 12% interest awarded by the tribunal is on higher side. The tribunal ought to have awarded 9% interest instead of 12%. Therefore, the interest is reduced from 12% to 9%. The excess amount of 3% of interest will be refunded back to the appellant-
Insurance Company, if the same is deposited by the appellant with the tribunal.
8. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed only qua the interest. The judgment and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. Decree be drawn accordingly.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI,J.]