INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. ASHA RANI PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the appeals filed by different appellants under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the common judgment and order dated 30.08.1995, passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Faizabad, in Claim Petition No.133 of 1993. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.09.1998, Sri Chhabi Nath Padney, husband and father of the claimants was going by an official car from Raebareli to Lucknow, from where he was supposed to fly to Geneva via New Delhi to attend a meeting. He was working as Additional General Manager in Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., Raebareli (in short, "ITI"). He was aged about 48 years. On the date of accident, he was going from Raebareli to Lucknow Airport in an official Ambassador Car No. UGB 4040. When the car reached near Microwave Station on Raebareli Lucknow road, about 8.00 p.m., it has collied with one loaded truck of iron rods. The car was driven by Sri Pratap Singh, who was holding a valid driving license and was an employee of the ITI. Sri Chhabi Nath Pandey was taken to Balrampur Hospital and K.G.M.C. Lucknow, lastly, to Sanjai Gandhi Post Graduate Institute, Lucknow, where after seven days, he died. The appellants-claimants have filed a claim petition for Rs.8,00,000/-, out of which, a total claim of Rs.7,54,000/- was awarded against the ITI and the National Insurance Company jointly and severely, who had provided the insurance cover to the Ambassador Car in question, but no liability was fixed on the Truck owner and the Oriental Insurance Company, who had insured the Truck No. URL-9855. Being aggrieved, the National Insurance Company Ltd., Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., as well as the claimants have filed present appeals.

(2.) WITH this background, Sri R.S. Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants (FAFO No. 276 of 1995) submits that the compensation is meager one. Ex-gratia payment of Rs. Three Lacs has wrongly been deducted by the ITI from the total compensation awarded. He further submits that the employer has taken an amount of Rs.65,228/- under the Workmen's Compensation Act as a part of the compensation wrongly. The Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 11. He also submits that no compensation was awarded for the mental agony, pain and suffering as well as the future prospects. This is also a plea of the learned counsel for the appellant that no benefit of time pay scale of the deceased was given to family members. So, he made a request that the total compensation may be awarded more than Rs.15,00,000/-. The ex-gratia payment should not be a part of the compensation. For this purpose, he has relied on the ratio laid down on the following cases :-

(3.) SRI U.P.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the National Insurance Company (FAFO No. 275 of 1995) submits that driver of the car was holding a Heavy Motor Vehicle (HMV) driving license and as per Motor Vehicles Act, no person shall drive a transport vehicle in a public place, unless his driving license specifically entitled to do so and as per the facts of the case, the driver of the Ambassador Car was holding a driving license in the category of HMV i.e., he does not have any valid and effective license issued by the competent authority to drive the light motor vehicle (LMV). So, the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal is not sustainable in the eye of law.