USHA RANI Vs. PRITAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the award dated 10.02.2006 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (the Tribunal for short) whereby a sum of `1,34,400/- was awarded as compensation to the appellants in the Claim Petition filed by them for seeking compensation on account of death of Jagmohan Lal, the husband of appellant no.1 Usha Rani and father of minor children Sunita, Anuj and Nitin.

(2.) ON 19.2.1984, the deceased was travelling in a truck bearing registration number PBO 4695 which was being driven by respondent Pritam Singh in a rash and reckless manner and when he applied the brakes, the deceased was thrown out of the truck and died instantly. The awarded compensation of `1,34,400/- by the Tribunal was made up of `1,22,400/- on account of loss of dependency of the claimants, `2,000/- on account of funeral expenses, `5,000/- on account of loss of consortium, `2500/- on account of loss of estate and `2500/- on account of loss of love and affection. In arriving at loss of dependency of appellants, the Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.600/- and added Rs.1200/- being double the salary and thereafter took the mean by dividing it by 2 and thereby arrived at the average monthly income of the deceased at `900/- per month. The learned Tribunal made deduction of 1/3rd i.e. `300/- per month as towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased and thus assessed `600/- per month or say `7200/- per annum as loss of dependency of the appellants/claimants. The Tribunal applied a multiplier of 17 and arrived at a figure of `1,22,400/- as loss of dependency of the appellants/ claimants. The appellants/ claimants have assailed the award alleging that the compensation awarded to them is highly on the lower side. It was averred that the deceased was working in MCD as LDC and had he not died in the accident, his salary would have been increased to `12,000/- per month in the year 2005. In this regard, reliance was placed on the testimony of PW7, an official of MCD. The compensation is also challenged on other grounds. The awarded rate of interest @ 9% till the year 2000 and thereafter @ 5.5.% till the date of payment was also alleged to be on lower side.

(3.) THE appeal stands disposed accordingly.