KAMLABAI Vs. KAMLESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern disposal of M. A. No. 3136/06 as both the appeals are arising out of one award dated 10-7-06 passed by MACT, Neemuch in Claim Case No. 83/05 whereby claim petition filed by appellant was allowed and compensation of Rs. 2,52,000/- was awarded in a death case. In M. A. No. 3487/07 filed by claimant/appellant grievance is that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side and the same be enhanced. In M. A. No. 3136/06 the grievance of respondent No. 5 is that respondent No. 5 has wrongly been held liable for payment of compensation which ought to have been exonerated.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that appellant/claimant filed claim petition alleging that on 29-5-05 while deceased Gajendra Yadav was returning from his job, at that time, was travelling in a tractor bearing registration No. RJ-09/r-7261, which was being driven by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and insured with respondent No. 5. It was alleged that because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 appellant fell down from the tractor and sustained grievous injuries. Deceased was brought to hospital but unfortunately expired on 6-6-05. It was alleged that since the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 and offending tractor was insured with respondent No. 5, therefore, claim petition be allowed and compensation be awarded. The claim petition was contested by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 owner of the offending tractor and also by respondent no. 5, i. e. , Insurance Company. The defence of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 was that no accident has occurred by the offending tractor while the defence of respondent No. 5 was that even if any accident has taken place in which gajendra has died then respondent No. 5 is not liable for payment of compensation as offending vehicle was insured under farmer package policy. It was prayed that the claim petition be dismissed against respondent No. 5. On the basis of pleadings of parties learned Tribunal framed issues, recorded the evidence and awarded compensation of Rs. 2,52,000/- break up of which is as under: towards loss of dependency Rs. 2,16,000/-towards and love and affection Rs. 25,000/-towards consortium Rs. 5,000/-towards funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/-towards medical expenses Rs. 1,000/-

(3.) BEING aggrieved by inadequacy of amount of award, passed by the learned Tribunal M. A. No. 3487/04, present appeal has been filed. Learned counsel for appellant submits that income of the deceased. Gajendra has been assessed as Rs. 70/- per day while the deceased was skilled labour. He was working as mason and was getting Rs. 250/- per day. It is submitted that multiplier of 12 has been applied by the learned Tribunal while assessing loss of dependency, which ought to have been 17, looking to the age of the deceased, and looking to the age of the appellant, which is 32 years at the time of accident. It is submitted that while assessing the dependency learned tribunal deducted l/3rd amount towards personal expenses which ought to have l/4th. The amount awarded on account of medical expenses, is also on lower side.