ANJALI VILAS Vs. PRABHA RAJENDRA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal is filed by the Original Claimants for enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thane in M.A.C.P. No. 209 of 2013 by Judgment and Order dtd. 17/2/2018. The Appellants are heirs and legal representatives of the deceased -Vilas Ramkumar Deshpande ("the deceased"), who died in a road accident that took place on 15/12/2012.

(2.) The Appellants filed M.A.C.P. No. 209 of 2013 on 25/3/2013 and claimed an amount of Rs.2.32 crores by way of compensation. It was the case of the Appellants that the deceased was 46 years of age on the date of his death. He was working as Senior Manager with Ultratech Cement Limited at Mumbai and was entitled to monthly salary of Rs.1,33,455.00 plus other allowances to the extent of Rs.20,000.00 per month. It was also contended that the deceased was expecting to get promotion in a span of two to three years and his salary would have increased to Rs.1,75,000.00 to Rs.2,50,000.00 within a span of two to three years from the date of his death. The Appellant also claimed Rs.2,50,000.00 for medical expenses of the deceased, Rs.20,000.00 for consortium, Rs.5000.00 for funeral expenses, Rs.5000.00 for transportation, Rs.40,000.00 for loss of love and affection, Rs.50,000.00 towards loss of estate. Thus, the claim of Appellants was more than Rs.2.30 crores. Thus, the Appellants claimed an amount of Rs.2.32 crores by way of compensation.

(3.) In the claim petition, Respondent No. 1 was served. However, he did not appear and the claim petition proceeded ex-parte against Respondent no. 1. Respondent No. 2 -Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd ("the insurance company") appeared and filed written statement. Respondent No. 2 admitted that the offending vehicle was insured with it at the time of the accident, however, contended that the liability was subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The insurance company denied that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent at the time of the accident and also denied that the car was driven at a high speed. The insurance company contended that there was negligence on the part of the driver of the car in which the deceased was traveling. The contention raised by the Appellants regarding the nature of the job of the deceased as well as the income as stated by the Appellants was denied. Thus, the insurance company disputed the computation of income as claimed by the Appellants.