SATBIR SINGH Vs. SURAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal is directed against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, dated September 26, 1980. One Ashok Kumar died in an accident on February 4 1971 at 3.00 P.M. in Green Park. He was going on his cycle and was dashed by a tractor, DLL 3068, driven by Satbir Singh. The father of the deceased lodged a claim. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 25,920.00 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the award. The learned Tribunal held that the age of the deceased at the time of the accident was 22 years and that of the father of the petitioner was 41 years. The deceased would have provided financial assistance to his father for 20 years. The earning capacity of the boy could not be less than Rs. 300.00 per month, out of which he would have spared about Rs. 200.00 per month for his father at least for four years until he was married. After marriage, he could have spared Rs. 100.00 per month for his father. Thus, the dependency was valued for the first four years at Rs. 9600.00 and for the remaining 16 years at Rs. 19,200.00 . Out of the total of Rs. 28,800.00 , 10% deduction was made on account of contingencies of life and lumpsum payment. Hence, the award of Rs. 25,920.00 .

(2.) In the memo of appeal, this award is challenged on the grounds both in regard to finding of negligence on the part of the driver and in regard to the quantum of demages, but only the second ground -was pressed before me.

(3.) It was submitted that the claimant was unable to prove his initial case that the deceased was a medical practitioner and was earning Rs. 1000.00 or so per month. Yet, the Tribunal awarded the claim merely on the basis of supposition and conjectures. No evidence was led about the educational and other qualifications of the deceased and there was no material for holding that the boy could earn Rs. 300.00 per month. As a matter of fact, if any evidence was led, then, the appellants would have led evidence to prove that the deceased was not in a position to earn anything. Moreover, if the boy was expected to earn Rs 300.00 per month, then he could have hardly given anything to his father because this much amount would not even be sufficient to meet his own expenses. He could at the most afford to give not more than Rs. 50.00 to his perents.