NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. HEMALATA BHUYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals, one at the instanceof the Insurance Company and the other by the claimants, ariseout of the judgment and award passed by the Second MotorAccident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack, in Misc, Case No. 384/1990,directing the Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs. 1,06,000/ -including a sum of Rs. 5,000/ - towards loss of consortium, toclaimant -respondents 1 to 3.

(2.) CLAIMANT -respondent No. 1 is the widow and claimant -respondents 2 and 3 are the parents of deceased Framed. Kumar Bhuyan, who died on 28 -3 -1990 at 8.30 p.m. while he was comingby a cycle when the Dumper bearing registration number WBI 5673 belonging to the owner -respondent No. 4 knocked down the deceased from front side resulting his death. The claimants filed claim application claiming Rs. 2,00,000/ - as compensation. The owner did not appear and the Insurance Company contested the case by filing a written statement generally denying the allegations made in the claim application. The Claims Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the claimants and after framing issues, determined the compensation at Rs. 1,01,000/ - and further awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/ -to claimant No. 1, the widow, towards loss of consortium and directed the Insurance Company to pay the entire amount of Rs. 1,06,000/ -.

(3.) NOW coming to the appeal filed by the claimants (Misc. Appeal No. 53/97), on going through the judgment/award passed by the Claims Tribunal. I do not find any justification to interfere with the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal. It has been contended on behalf of the claimants that since the deceased was the only bread -earner of the family and he prematurely died, the award of Rs. 5,000/ - to claimant -respondent No. 1, the widow, towards loss of consortium is quite low and at least Rs.20,000/ - should have been given on this head, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has repelled the said contention by stating that assessment of loss of consortium cannot be made in money value and in the absence of any further statistics before this Court, the amount need not be increased. Upon hearing the learned counsels for both parties, I find that the amount of Rs. 5,000/ - granted by the Claims Tribunal is to meagre to console the respondents. I, therefore,raise it to Rs. 10,000/ - on humanitarian ground since the claimants have lost the victim who was the only bread -earner of the family. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation along with interest and cost as directed by the Claims Tribunal before the Claims Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of this order. Out of the said deposit, Rs.26,000)/ - shall be paid to the parents of the deceased jointly and a sum of Rs. 20,000/ - out of the interest portion shall be paid to the claimant -widow and the rest amount shall be kept in un unencumberable fixed deposit in any nationalised bank in the name of claimant -widow for a period of ten years with liberty to withdraw monthly interest. Misc. Appeal No. 53/97 is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.