BENNY Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the owner of a vehicle (Trekker) in which passengers are carried for hire and reward. The said vehicle met with an accident on 5-5-1985 around 9 a.m. In the accident a pedestrian was knocked down. He sustained injuries and later died due to the said injuries. His widow and children made a claim against the appellant, and the driver of the vehicle as well as the insurer for compensation in respect of the death of the deceased. Claims Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,10,000/- as compensation. However the Claims Tribunal limited the liability of the Insurance Company to Rs.50,000/-. Interest at the rate of 12% per annum was allowed from the date of the claim petition. This appeal is hence filed by the owner of the vehicle in challenge of the quantum of compensation fixed as well as the limit of insurers liability.

(2.) There is no dispute that the accident happened involving the trekker (KEE 8339). There is no dispute that the appellant was the owner of the vehicle on the date of accident. There is no dispute that the vehicle at the time of accident was covered by a policy of insurance with the 5th respondent, Insurance Company. There is also no dispute that the deceased died due to the injuries sustained as a consequence of the accident.

(3.) But there is dispute regarding the age of deceased. Claims Tribunal found that the deceased was aged 36. Learned counsel for appellant referred us to Ext.A4, post mortem certificate in which the doctor who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased has mentioned that the age of the deceased was 45. It is not known as to how the doctor would have fixed the age of the deceased at 45. The claimants have mentioned the age of the deceased in the claim petition as 36. None of the contesting parties had disputed the same. That apart, the widow of the deceased when examined as P.W.1 has deposed that the age of her deceased husband was 36 at the time of death, and the said evidence remains unchallenged. The age of Pw.1 was 30 when she was examined before the Claims Tribunal on 9-3-1989. This fact lends further credence to her testimony regarding the age of her deceased husband. We, therefore, agree with the Claims Tribunal in finding the age of the deceased as 36 on the date of the accident