LAXMIDBAR MOHANTY Vs. BHANN DEI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are appeals under -Section 110 -D of the Motor Vehicles Act, Misc. Appeal No. 86 of 1977 is by the owner of the stage carriage vehicle and Misc. Appeal No. 171 of 1977 is by one of the claimants who received injuries. The short facts are these:

(2.) THAT the stage carriage vehicle was insured with the New India Assurance Company is not disputed. From the facts of the Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that the bus was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and that contributed to the collision. In fact, the counsel for the insurer has not been able to dispute that finding in view of the fact that evidence is clear. P.W. 1, Dr. Sanatan Rath, Professor of Neuro -Surgery attached to the Medical College Hospital Cuttack, has given the details of the injuries sustained by Smt. Ray. He has stated:

(3.) NOW coming to the other appeal (Misc. Appeal No 86/77) by the owner of bus, the deceased was a sub -contractor working in Assam area. There is some evidence to show that he was making a good living and was earning between Rs 700/ - and Rs. 900/ - a month out of which he was contributing about Rs. 3,500/ - to the family per year. At the time of death, it was claimed that he was about 35 years of age. His age has been disputed, and the learned Tribunal has determined his age to be about 50. Even conceding that his age to be 50 at the time of death and the claimants had suppressed it, he would have earned at the same rate for about 15 years until he reached the age of 65. The learned Tribunal, keeping the uncertainties of life in view, has reduced the period to 10 years. The deceased's contribution to the family has been fixed at Rs. 150/ - per month which seems to be grossly low. The dependents were many and it would be reasonable to estimate his contribution at Rs. 2,500/ -per year. On that basis, for 10 years he would have contributed Rs. 25,000/ -. Even slashing one -sixth out of it for lump sum payment, the compensation admissible would have come to Rs. 20,850/ - or so. In view of this finding the appeal has to fail and the cross -appeal has to be allowed in part. While I dismiss the appeal, I allow the cross -appeal to the extent that in place of compensation of Rs. 15,000/ -, a sum of Rs. 21,000/ - in round figures shall be awarded as compensation. Out of it, Rs. 5,000/ - shall be the statutory liability of the insurer and the balance amount shall be borne by the owner of the bus. The compensation shall carry interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of claim till payment.