ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. VIJAYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cross-objectors in M.F.A. Crob. No. 213/2006 were the petitioners in M.V.C. No. 3479/2005 on the file of the M.A.C.T., Bangalore City. The appellant in M.F.A. No. 5202/2006 was the second respondent in the said petition, which was filed tinder Section 166of The I.M.V. Act, 1988 claiming compensation on account of the death of one Thammanna, who sustained injuries in a road traffic accident and died. The claim petition has been allowed in part and compensation of Rs.6,20,000.00 with interest at 6% has been awarded by the M.A.C.T. Aggrieved by the award, the Insurance Company has filed the appeal. Contending that the award is low, the petitioners before the M.A.C.T. have filed the cross-objections.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the records.

(3.) Shri K. Suryanarayana Rao, learned advocate for the appellant/Insurance Company contended that the learned member of the Tribunal has erred in fixing the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000.00 per month, from agriculture and milk business and not noticing that the land possessed by the deceased still remains with the family and the deprivation of income is not strictly applicable to a case where agricultural income is the source. The learned counsel contended that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have taken the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000.00 per month and hence the award is excessive.