RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. REMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal on hand is originated from an award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad (for short, 'the Tribunal') on 10/6/2016 in O.P(M.V) No.665/2011. The appellant is the 4th respondent in the above Original Petition, who is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Challenge is raised mainly against the quantum of compensation stood awarded by the Tribunal for the reason that it is exorbitant.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties to this appeal will hereinafter be referred to as petitioners 1 to 3 and respondent No.4 in accordance with their status in the Original Petition.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel that the victim of the motor accident who died, was not having regular and permanent employment and therefore, the Tribunal ought not to have added 30% to the monthly income in consideration of loss of future prospects. According to her, the age of the deceased was not proved by petitioners before the Tribunal and therefore, the multiplier of 13 adopted by the Tribunal and addition of 30% to the monthly income in consideration of loss of future prospects are without any basis. According to her, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3rd , instead of 1/4th towards the expenses the victim would have spend, had he been alive. According to her, Tribunal went wrong in awarding Rs.1,00,000.00 as compensation towards loss of consortium only in favour of the spouse of the deceased, ignoring the fact that minor children, two in numbers and the mother also survived him and are entitled to get compensation under that head.