MOHD KARIM KHAN Vs. SHAMSHER KHAN HASAN KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed in this appeal will also govern the disposal of M. A. No. 323 of 1995 (Shamsher Khan v. Mohammad Karim Khan and 4 others ). This is claimants' appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') against the award dated 29-11-1984 passed in claim Case No. 12/91 by the Vth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are thus; on 6-3-1991, the deceased Mohd. Ismail was travelling as a passenger in Auto Rikshaw No. MPO 23-/b-1005 owned and driven by respondent No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 2. Due to negligent driving, the Auto Rikshaw turned turtle as a result of which Mohd. Ismail received severe injuries. He was taken to D. K. Hospital but could not be survived. The widow Smt. Koushar Suraiya, who died during the pendency of the application under Section 166 of the Act, for compensation along with appellants as legal representatives of the deceased claimed compensation of Rs. 5,53,000/- for the death of Mohd. Ismail caused in motor accident. The Tribunal, after holding that the accident was caused due to negligent driving of Auto Rikshaw, awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,32,000/- , with interest thereon at the rate of 12% percent per annum from the date of application, that is, 3-5-1991 till realisation. The respondent No. 1 was made liable to pay the compensation absolving the respondent No. 2, as the respondent No. 1 was not holding a valid licence.

(3.) SHRI Alok Aradhe, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the compensation awarded is not just and fair. The deceased was aged 47 years and was employed in Government Primary School, at Ramnagar, Raipur, whose gross pay was Rs. 2360/- as is proved by Ex. A-l. The Tribunal estimated the dependency at Rs. 1100/- per month, yearly Rs. 13,200/-; in that a multiplier of 10 was applied, the amount was worked out to Rs. 1,32,000/ -. The Tribunal had not taken into account the future prospects of advancement in life and career which also ought to have been sounded in terms of money to augment the multiplicand; multiplier selected is also on lower side. Besides the conventional amount for consortium and loss of estate and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- for funeral expenses ought to have been awarded. A decision of the Supreme Court in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Sussama Thomas, 1994 MPLJ 520 (SC) - AIR 1994 SC 1631, was cited. Absolvement of the respondent No. 2 was challenged as illegal because the owner himself was driving who was holding valid driving licence (Ex. A. 6) to drive light motor vehicles. It merely did not bear the endorsement to drive the transport vehicle; but he was not disqualified to drive the transport vehicle, that is, Auto Rikshaw,. which the Tribunal has not taken into consideration.