(1.) THIS appeal by the claimants is arising out of the judgment and award dated 20.11.2010 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short), in MVC No.350/2009.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that claimant No.1 is the father and claimant No.2 is the mother of the deceased Sridhara @ Lingamurthy. The claimants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal under section 166 of the MV Act seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,00,000/ - for the death of their son in the motor vehicle accident. It is the case of the claimants that, when their son Sridhara @ Lingamurthy was travelling in Maruti Car bearing registration No.KA -17 -M - 8114 on 8.8.2008, driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA -14/GB -9223 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and stopped it suddenly. The driver of the Maruti car who was driving the same in rash and negligent manner hit against the said lorry due to which the deceased and inmates of the said car sustained injuries and the deceased succumbed to injuries. The appellants being the aged parents of the deceased and there is nobody to look after them, filed the aforesaid claim petition against the respondents. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 being the driver and owner of the offending vehicle, filed their objection statement admitting the fact that the accident took place on the aforesaid date and the deceased died due to the injuries sustained in the said accident. They contended that respondent No.3 insurance company is liable to pay compensation and prayed to dismiss the petition as against them. Respondent No.3 -insurance company in its objection statement denied the allegation made in the claim petition. It was averred that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and hence, the owner and insurer of the said lorry are also necessary parties to the petition. The driver of the offending car had no valid driving licence and the offending car was not insured with it. The deceased was travelling in the offending car as a passenger and the insurance does not cover the risk of the passenger. It was contended that Respondent No.3 is not liable to pay compensation. Hence sought for dismissal of the petition. The Tribunal after assessing the materials on record partly allowed the petition and awarded the compensation of Rs.7,00,000/ - with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim made by the claimants. The appellants -claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants -claimants during the course of the arguments, submitted that the Tribunal has failed to grant adequate compensation even though the claimants produced the materials to show that the income of the deceased was more than Rs.16,00,000/ - per annum. It is further submitted that the deceased filed income tax return before the authority on 27.3.2008 and subsequently on 4.7.2008, the BBMP gave form No.16A to the deceased. The Tribunal has ignored these materials in assessing the monthly income of the deceased. He submitted that the income of the deceased may be reassessed. He submitted that the award of compensation on all the other heads is also not assessed properly. He sought for allowing the appeal by reassessing the income of the deceased and to award the just and reasonable compensation .