BABULAL Vs. U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act filed by the claimant for enhancement of Compensation awarded to them by the Claims Tribunal. The son of the claimants, aged about 8 years, was killed in an accident near village Malakia on 4-3-75 at about 3.25 P.M. with Passenger Bus No. USS 4127 which was going from Allahabad to Lucknow. A claim for Rs. 30,000/- was lodged under various heads but the Claims Tribunal, after recording findings that the driver of the Bus was negligent, has awarded Rs. 17,600/- by way of compensation to them.

(2.) SINCE the Corporation was not chosen to file appeal against the award the question of its accountability for damages need not be enquired into. The only question that requires consideration in the appeal is the amount of compensation which ought to have been awarded to the claimants. Sri Jaiswal, appearing for the appellant, has assailed the findings on various grounds. According to him the Claims Tribunal has erred in taking the life expectancy to be 60 years in the case of the claimants while it should have been taken as 70 years. He has also contended that although the Claims Tribunal while setting the amount of compensation has assessed damages at Rs. 24,000/- yet the award has been made for Rs. 20,000/-because only that much amount had been claimed under that head. According to him, so long as the total claimed assessed by the Claims Tribunal fell within the limits of the total claim made in the petition the same ought to have been awarded irrespective of heads under which the claim has been divided. He also assailed the deduction of 20% made by the Claims Tribunal from the amount of damages assessed. According to him no deduction for lump sum nature of the claim was justified in this case because the claimants were neither given any ex-gratia payment by way of interim relief although promised by the Corporation at one stage nor the Claims Tribunal had taken into account the likely increase in prices and consequent devaluation of the rupee. The last argument advanced was that while awarding compensation the Tribunal should be liberal, more so in the case of Harijans and interest also should have been awarded from the date of the claim petition at the rate of 12%.

(3.) IN this case the deceased was a lad of eight years. Admittedly, his parents did not possess any agricultural land and there is nothing to show that they had been engaged in agriculture. The evidence show that this lad was helping his parents in looking after the rearing of pegs, tending gowa and shepherding the goats. No. proof has been given to show that this boy was getting any education anywhere. The argument that as the boy belonged to scheduled caste he had bright chances of entering in Government service is, therefore, not correct. There is no reliable evidence on the record to establish that he was getting any education at the time of his death and, therefore, it is difficult to conceive how he could have managed to get any job. He was only helping his parents in some odd jobs of a routine nature and it is hardly possible to hold that the boy had bright chance of getting an employment is Government service.