GABBAR SINGH Vs. MAHESH KOLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is claimants appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded to them by the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 15 of 2004 vide award dated 30th June 2004. It is the case of the claimants that because of the accident that took place on 17th October 2003 in the night at 8:00 son of the claimant. Ranjeet Singh suffered serious injury and died when tractor bearing No. MP07/HA4362 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 and owned by the respondent No. 2, hit Ranjeet Singh. Because of the accident and death of their child, the claimants made a claim of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lacs only). The Tribunal on the basis of the evidence and material that came on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 80,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the presentation of the claim application till payment.

(2.) THE claimants are parents of Ranjeet Singh and it is an admitted fact that the deceased Ranjeet Singh was aged 9 years. The Tribunal by taking the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- by assessing the dependency of the parents at l/3rd of the income of the deceased and after applying a multiplier of '15' granted compensation of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand only) and added to that a further sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. Thus, awarded the total amount of compensation Rs. 80,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only).

(3.) HOWEVER , refuting the aforesaid and placing reliance on another Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Halki Bai and another v. Managing Director, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and another [2004 (3) TAC 821], Shri Gajendragadkar argued that in this case, the Division Bench has held that when parents are dependents of the deceased, their dependency can be assessed at one-third of the income of the deceased. Accordingly, he submits that in view of the law laid down in the case of Halki Bai and another (supra), the dependency assessed by the Tribunal is proper. Thereafter, inviting my attention to certain observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Laxmi Sadho v. Jagdish [(2001) 2 SCC 247], Shri Gajendragadkar submitted that there being conflicting view taken in the case of Halki Bai and another (supra) and Ram Kishore Dixit and others (supra), the matter should be referred to a larger Bench. He also invites my attention to another judgment of this Court in MA No. 242 of 2001 decided on 26th July 2006 (Narain Singh and another v. Sadhu Singh and others) wherein the dependency has been assessed at 50% by this Court. That apart, placing reliance on another judgment of this Court in the case of Parathsingh v. Sanjay Sharma [2003 (1) TAC 163 (M.P.)] submits that the appeal is liable to be dismissed.