UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MATHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the respondent No. 3 in a claim petition filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, by the petitioners, who claimed as legal heirs and dependants of one Dinto Mathew, who died as a result of the injury sustained in an accident, due to negligence on the part of the driver of a lorry. This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Tribunal, by which the claimants-respondents are granted an amount of Rs. 4,12,500.

(2.) We heard the learned senior Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The learned senior Counsel for the appellant Mr. Mathew Jacob raised three contentions before us. Firstly, it is contended that the Tribunal erred in fixing the income at Rs. 3,000 per month. The complaint is that apart from producing certain documents, which may show that deceased possessed certain qualifications, there is no evidence to show the actual income that is derived by the deceased. Secondly, it is contended that this is a case where the multiplier adopted by the Claims Tribunal is erroneous. It is contended that proper multiplier should have been 13. However, the Tribunal has taken the multiplier as 17. The Tribunal has taken the multiplier considering the age of the deceased as 23. It is contended that having regard to the decision of the Apex Court in Ramesh Singh v. Satbir Singh, 2008 1 ACC 765, the Tribunal has erred in taking the multiplier as 17.