SATYABHAMA Vs. MUSIR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall govern also the disposal of M.A. No. 225/2012 as in both the appeals award under challenge is dated 11.11.2011 passed by 10th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in claim case No. 297/ 2010. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 18,44,659/ - with interest to the claimants for the death of one Rao Sahib, who died in a vehicle accident. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, need to be enhanced. According to respondent No. 3 amount awarded is on higher side. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement/reduction in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out and if so what extent?

(2.) IT is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants' favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross appeal or cross objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for Insurance Company submits that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on higher side. It is submitted that deceased was working as daily rated employee and his salary was being paid as daily rated employee which was differing in each of the month. It is submitted that academic qualification of the deceased is not on record. There is absolutely no evidence about the future prospects of the decased. The income assessed by the learned Tribunal is taxable but no amount has been deducted by the learned Tribunal on that account. It is submitted that the interest on the total amount is more than the income of the deceased while the expenses of family was reduced because of the death of Rao Sahib. It is submitted that the appeal filed by the appellants be dismissed and the appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 be allowed and the amount awarded be reduced.