SEETHA LAKSHMI KRISHNAN Vs. GIAN PERKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a regular First Appeal against the orderdated 20.5.75 of the. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi, (hereinafterreferred to as the Tribunal) on an application under Section 110A of the MotorVehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This application hadbeen made by the appellants herein claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00in all on account of the death of one Shri S. Krishnan. It was registered as suitNo. 234/70. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 37,950.00only as compensation. The Tribunal also ordered payment of interest at the rate of 6% perannum from the date of the award till the date of realisation.

(2.) In this appeal filed on 18.10.75 the award has been challenged onvarious grounds by the appellants. It is worth-noting that in ground No. 5 ofthe Grounds of Appeal the appellants took the stand that the compensationpayable to them comes to more than Rs. 2,50,000.00 and have claimed thattherefore the Tribunal ought to have awarded the sum of Rs. 2,00,000.00 tothem as compensation. The appellants therefore restricted their claim forcompensation in the appeal also to Rs. 2,00,000.00 in all. There is no cross appealfiled by respondent No. 2, Union of India.

(3.) During the pendency of this appeal an application under Order 41Rule 33 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code was filed on 20.4.87 on behalf of theappellants. This application was registered as CM 1374/87. The prayer in thisapplication was that the increase in the pay and allowances of governmentservants may be taken note of while allowing the compensation since thedeceased was also a government servant. It was contended in this applicationthat the subsequent events such as the rise in salary and allowances due to therecommendations of the various Pay Commissions should be taken into accountwhile awarding the compensation. Notice of this application was issued to therespondents. Union of India, respondent No. 2, was served with the notice ofthe application. However, no counter affidavit reply to this application wasfiled on its behalf. On 17.8.87 it was ordered that this application be taken upfor consideration along with the main appeal.