UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. C MALLIKARJUNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The insurer of a vehicle, owned by the 6th respondent herein, is the appellant. Respondents 1 and 2 are the parents, respondent No.3 is the sister and respondents 4 and 5 are the brothers of late C. Raju. They filed O.P. No.607 of 2000, in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Anantapur, claiming a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-, as compensation. They pleaded that the deceased was working as a cleaner on a lorry owned by the 6th respondent, and insured with the appellant, and was being paid a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards salary and Rs.50/- per day, towards batta. It was alleged that on 28-4-1999, the deceased was proceeding on the lorry, and when the driver applied sudden brake in a rash and negligent manner, he fell down and died instantly. The deceased was said to be 21 years old, when he died. After finding that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the lorry, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,56,200/-, towards compensation, to respondents 1 and 2.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the death of the deceased occurred, only on account of the careless and negligent manner, in which he sat in the lorry, and since neither he was hit by the lorry, nor suffered any injuries attributable to it, the appellant cannot be held liable to pay the compensation. She further contends that though the age of the mother of the deceased was to be taken into account, in the matter of selecting the proper multiplier, the Tribunal has taken the age of the deceased, into account.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondents 1 to 5, on the other hand, submits that the deceased died during the course of employment, that too, by falling from the running lorry, and in that view of the matter, the appellant is liable to pay the compensation. He contends that the Tribunal had appreciated the matter from the proper perspective, both while recording a finding as to the cause of death, and determination of compensation, and that no interference is called for with the award.