SHAIL SHRIVASTAVA Vs. HARISH CHAUKSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is directed against the award dated 8.2.2005 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 181 of 2002 insofar as it declines to grant compensation as claimed by the appellants under section 166 of the said Act.

(2.) The said claim was filed in respect of death of Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava, husband of Shail Shrivastava, appellant No. 1 and father of appellant Nos. 2 and 3, namely, Anurag and Aditya and a sum of Rs. 75,00,000 was claimed as compensation.

(3.) Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava was a Professor in G.S.I.T.S. Engineering College, Indore. His date of birth was 15.8.47. It was not disputed that on the date of incident, a tanker bearing registration No. NL 01-A 4705 was parked on the road, as there was some fault. It was also not disputed that as a result of collision with the said tanker and vehicle Toyota bearing registration No. MH 04-AY 7595, a case under section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code was launched against Kundiram Shinde, respondent No. 2, allegedly the driver of the vehicle. The death of Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava was also not disputed. It was further not disputed that Toyota and the tanker were insured with respondent Nos. 3 and 6 respectively. The case of the applicants was that on 24.2.2002 at about 10 p.m. while deceased Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava was travelling by the said Toyota, which was being driven by non-applicant No. 2, on account of rashness and negligent driving of the said vehicle, while the vehicle reached Malkapur it collided with a parked tanker. The negligence of the tanker was also evident from the fact that no indicators or parking lights were switched on to indicate that the tanker had been parked. Report of the incident was made at the police station and the driver of Toyota was prosecuted. Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava was working as Professor and was about to be promoted. If he would have continued in service till the age of 62 years, during this period, he would have earned many promotions. On account of his academic qualifications he would have continued in employment till the age of 75 years. In view of his income from salary and other allowances, a sum of Rs. 75,00,000 was claimed as compensation on account of his untimely demise.