RAMESH KHATIC Vs. RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded by the 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 88/2000. The claimants are parents of one Surendra Kumar, a boy aged 14 years, who died in a motor accident on 14.12.1999 involving tractor bearing registration No. MPW-5546 owned by respondent No, 2, driven by respondent No. 1.

(2.) THE appellants inter alia contended that their son Surendra Kumar was a student and at the time of accident he was in Class 7, claimed compensation of Rs. 1,54,500 (Rupees one lac fifty-four thousand five hundred only) as per Schedule II of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that in this case a 14 years old boy was killed in a accident on 14.2.1999. The learned Tribunal assessed notional income for non-earning person at the rate of Rs. 15,000 per annum and since the claimants are mother and father of the deceased, the Claims Tribunal assessed 1/3rd of the total income of the deceased i.e., Rs. 5,000 per annum and after applying multiplier of 15, awarded Rs. 75,000 which is just and proper compensation. He submitted that deceased was a young boy and in future he will be married and looking to his family prospects assessed the annual dependency of the parents at Rs. 5,000 per annum i.e., 1/3rd of the total income of the deceased, which is just and proper and in accordance with law. He drew my attention to a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ramnath v. Prasanna Kumar Jain and Ors. , Single Bench decision of this Court in the case of Sujan Pal Singh and Anr. v. Chandan Singh Patel and Ors. reported in 2000 ACJ 339 and Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Khatoonbai and Ors. v. Prithvipal Singh and Anr. and argued that in the case of a young boy of 15 years of age the Division Bench of this Court awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 70,000 and Rs. 50,000 only and the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and in accordance with the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court.