BALASUBRAMANIAN Vs. V JAGATHEESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the petitioners in O.P. (MV) No. 1749 of 2007 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode and the aforesaid petition was filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation for the loss caused by the death of Rajesh Kumar. They are the legal representatives of the deceased Rajesh Kumar. They claimed an amount of Rs. 3,00, 000/- as compensation. The insurance company opposed the said application by disputing the cause of accident and the quantum of compensation claimed under the various heads, but admitted the coverage of the policy. After considering the evidence on record, the tribunal passed the impugned award granting Rs. 1,97, 298/- as compensation to the appellants. The inadequacy of the quantum of compensation is challenged in this appeal.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent insurance company. The sum and substance of the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the tribunal went wrong in fixing the monthly income of the deceased, compensation for loss of dependency, funeral expenses, love and affection and loss of estate. According to the learned counsel, the quantum of amount determined under the aforesaid heads of claim is inadequate and disproportionate with the actual expenses and the sufferings of the appellants.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent insurance company advanced arguments to justify the quantum of compensation determined under various heads of claim. According to the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, there is no scope for any interference with the determination of monthly income and compensation for loss of dependency, funeral expenses, loss of love and affection and loss of estate.