ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. PHOOL MATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vashudeo Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Tahir Abbas Rizvi, learned counsel for the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'UPSRTC') and Sri Sarvesh K. Saxena, learned counsel for the respondent no.1-claimant. None appears on behalf of respondents no.3 and 4, who are owner and driver of the vehicle respectively. I have also gone through the record of this appeal as well as of the Tribunal.

(2.) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the M.V. Act') has been filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 13.01.2009 passed in MACT No.222/70/2004 decided by learned Additional District Judge/ Fast Track Court No.2/ Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bahraich (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.1,62,000/- with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum in favour of the claimant respondent.

(3.) The brief facts for deciding this first appeal from order are that on 18.11.2004, when the deceased Sita Ram was coming to his house from Maraucha Mod along with his father on bicycle, a bus having Registration No.UP 32-Z 3901 came from Lucknow side in a rash and negligence manner driven by its driver, hit the by-cycle from its back and run away from the spot. Consequently, Sita Ram, who was cycling, sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The matter was reported to the police of Police Station Phakharpur on the same day. The deceased, who was unmarried, said to have earned Rs.2,000/- per month being casual labourer. Initially, the claim petition was filed by the father of the deceased but after his death, the mother the deceased was substituted. The claim petition was filed under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. The bus in question was being plied under an agreement between UPSRTC and the owner of the vehicle. The claim petition was contested by the appellant Oriental Insurance Company and UPSRTC. The Tribunal after considering the evidence adduced by the parties decided the claim petition holding therein that the deceased died in the motor accident occurred on 18.11.2014. However, the Tribunal also decided the question of negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle though it was not warranted at all in a claim under Section 163-A. The plea of non joinder of parties were negativated by the Tribunal. In Issue No.3, it was found that the offending vehicle was duly insured with the appellant Oriental Insurance Company on the date of accident. While deciding Issue No.6, the Tribunal after determining the notional income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per annum, deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses, out of the aforesaid amount and decided the dependency at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per annum and applied multiplier of 16 considering the age of the deceased as 15-16 years and added Rs.2000/- towards funeral expenses awarded a total sum of Rs.1,62,000/- as compensation.