STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. SURA BALA DEBNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Relying upon the recent decision rendered by the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , learned counsel for the State contends that the amount of compensation so awarded by the tribunal, needs to be reduced.

(2.) Certain facts are not indispute. On 4/10/2014 Sanjay Kr. Nath met with a motor vehicle accident as a result of which he expired. The offending vehicle, bearing registration No. TR02-0922 (commander jeep), is owned by the present appellant. The learned trial court has found the driver of the offending vehicle to be negligent notwithstanding the fact that at the time of the accident, the deceased was found to be under intoxication. It stands established on record that at the time of accident, the deceased who was on the wheels of the motor cycle, had parked the same on the road side. Out and out, the negligence is that of the driver of the vehicle, owned by the State. Thus, the fault is of the offending vehicle so owned by the State. The issue of negligence is thus not raised before the Court.

(3.) It is also not indisputed that the legal heirs of the deceased preferred a petition under Sec. -166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. That the claimants are the surviving legal heirs dependent upon the deceased is also not indispute, they are the mother, wife and the minor daughter of the deceased. It has not come on record that anyone of the claimants are gainfully employed or having their own independent income from other sources. Thus, the question of dependency is not raised before this Court.