HARIDAS ALIAS HARISH AMIN Vs. S. RAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) has been filed by the appellants who are the claimants against the award dated 29.09.2011 passed by the Tribunal.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that on 21.01.2009 at about 8.30 a.m., while the deceased Sandeep was riding the motor cycle, the drier of the lorry drove the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and while taking over the motor cycle of the deceased dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased as a result of which the deceased was thrown out on the road as a result of which the deceased suffered injuries on the head and multiple fractures. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged about 22 years and was working as meter reader in MESCOM. The appellants who are the parents and the brother and sister of the deceased filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation on account of death of the deceased. The respondent No.1 filed the written statement in which the claim of the appellants was disputed. The factum of accident was also denied by respondent No.1. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings framed the issues and vide award dated 29.09.2011, inter alia held that an accident took place on 21.01.2009 on account of rash and negligent driving of the lorry as a result of which the deceased sustained injuries and died. It was further held that the insurance company is liable to pay the amount of compensation which was quantified at Rs.3,87,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in applying the multiplier of 12 while taking into account the age of the mother of the deceased. It is further submitted that in view of laid down in 'NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., VS. PRANAY SETTI AND OTHERS', (2017) 16 SCC 680, the Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier depending upon the age of the deceased. It is further submitted that reasonable amount under the head of loss of consortium and funeral expenses etc have not been awarded to the appellants and therefore, the amount of compensation be enhanced and the award passed by the tribunal be suitably modified. In support of aforesaid submission, reliance has also been placed on decision of the supreme court in 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., VS. NANURAM', LAWS(SC) 2018 9 51. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has supported the award passed by the claims tribunal.