DIPALI SEN Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal arises out of the judgment and award dated 23rd July, 2009 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 2nd Court, Burdwan in MAC No. 21 of 2009. The appellants were the claimants before the Tribunal. They are the widow, sons and daughters of the deceased Subal Chandra Sen, a man of 63 years old claimed to be an employee at the date of his death and was earning Rs.4,500/- (Four Thousand Five Hundred) only per month. The claim application was filed by the above named persons under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Claims Tribunal praying for just compensation estimated to be Rs.2,88,000/- (Two Lakh Eighty Eight Thousand) only. In the claim application the appellantsclaimants stated that victim Subal Chandra Sen, hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased' who died in a motor accident on 26th February, 2004 caused by the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.WB-42F/1096 (Tata Sumo) covered by valid insurance policy with National Insurance Co. Ltd., the respondent No.1, hereinafter referred to as the 'Insurer'. The respondent No.2 is the owner of the offending vehicle being No.WB-42F/1096 (Tata Sumo), hereinafter referred to as the 'offending vehicle'. The claim application was contested by the Insurer by filing written statement. In its written statement the Insurer denied and disputed the pleadings made in the claim application and it has specifically denied that the victim was an employee of the alleged private company and that he was much above 70 years of age on the date of accident and further that he had no stable income at such age.

(2.) In order to prove their case the claimants produced three witnesses e.g. - i) Dipali Sen, widow of the deceased as P.W.1, ii) Pradip Kumar Das, P.W.2, an eye witness to the accident and iii) Imtiaz Khan, P.W.3. On perusal of the evidence-on-record, the learned Judge of the Tribunal held :

(3.) After perusal of the evidence the Tribunal disbelieved the income of the victim Subal Chandra Sen and it held that the victim was only entitled to have a notional income of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) only per annum. The Tribunal held that victim was entitled to a compensation for Rs.54,500/- (Fifty Four Thousand Five Hundred) only inclusive of Rs.4,500/- (Four Thousand Five Hundred) only, towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and further that the claimants were entitled to an interest @7% per annum on the said amount from the date of filing the claim petition till payment of the award except the period from 2nd September, 2006 to 2nd February, 2009 when the MAC Tribunal was lying vacant. In computation of the income, the Tribunal held it to be Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) only per annum. It held that 1/3rd from the said income should be deducted for personal and living expenses. And, according to the age group of 60 to 65 years it has used multiplier 5 as per the 2nd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Thus, the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.54,500/- (Fifty Four Thousand Five Hundred) only.