POPAT Vs. YETALA SUKHADEV JAGTAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and award passed by the MACT No.II Bijapur, in MVC No.1476/2010 is challenged in these appeals.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are;

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the insurer would contend that the Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 18, considering the age of the deceased instead of considering the age of the younger parent of the deceased. It is further contended that 1/3rd amount deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased from the monthly income of Rs.3,000/- is against the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of SARLA VERMA V/s DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION, 2009 ACJ 1298 . It is further submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not appreciating the material evidence available on record that there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased Avinash, which was proved and as such the Tribunal fastening the liability on the insurer to the extent of 75% is contrary to the material evidence available on record.