UNITED INDIA INSURANCE Vs. SITA BEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal the award passed by the 4th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri has been challenged by both, namely, the appellant -Insurance Company and the Respondent claimants.

(2.) AN application was field under Sec. 110 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act by the widow and children of the deceased Dijabar alias Duryadhan Maharana claiming compensation for untimely death of the deceased on account of an accident resulting from the vehicles bearing Registration No. ORX 5304 (Tractor) and OSX 4926 (Trekker) of the opp. parties who have been impleaded as owner and insurer of the offending trekker. The factual matrix involved in this case is follows : That on 29.12.1988 at about 7 P.M. the deceased Duryadhan Maharana with others was returning from Astaranga to Kakatpur in the offending trekker bearing Registration No. OSX -4926, which was being driven by the driver with a high speed in a rash and negligent manner. The offending trekker reached at Jinti Chhack of Astaranga -Kakatpur Road and collided against the tractor bearing Registration No. ORX5304 which was coming from the opposite direction equally moving in a high speed without blowing any horn. Out of the accident the offending tractor was completely damaged and all the passengers including the deceased were seriously injured. The deceased was removed to S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, but he succumbed to the injuries on the way. 4. P.M. Examination was conducted at S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack. A Police case registered bearing G.R. Case No. 490 of 1988 against the drivers of both the vehicles and chargesheet was submitted against them after completion of investigation. Both the drivers had valid driving licence and the vehicles were damaged. It is alleged by the petitioners that the deceased was only 35 years age with sound health. He was good carpenter having his own carpentry shop at Kakatpur Bazar and was earning Rs. 2400/ - per month from his shop. He was also getting net profit of Rs. 1500/ - by selling furnitures. Thus his contribution to the family was Rs. 2000/ - per month for the support and maintenance of the family. The claimants have further demanded Rs. 15,000/ - towards funeral expenses and Rs. 3000/ - towards conveyance expense for taking the deceased to the Medical College and Hospital. The respondents claims Rs. 3 lakhs for mental shock, physical pain and suffering, loss of contribution to them, loss of love and affection, loss of company and funeral expenses. 5. The appellant appeared before the Tribunal and filed their written statement denying the averments of the claimants. They further challenged the excessive and arbitrary compensation amount demanded by the claimant -respondents. The learned Tribunal after assessment of the evidence has come to the conclusion that the deceased was contributing Rs. 1000/ - per month for the maintenance and support of the family. The age of the deceased at the time of death was estimated to be 45 years. Thus he adopted 13 multiplier and assessed the total damage or Rs. 1,56,000/ -. Since the accident had been caused on account of rash and negligent driving of both the drivers of the offending vehicles, therefore, he had apportioned the total amount of Rs. 1,56,000/ - by directing to pay 50% each. In such event, the appellant was directed to pay/deposit Rs. 78,000/ - which is 50% of the total amount of Rs. 1, 56,000/ - besides the other amount of Rs. 15,000/ - towards the loss of family and Rs. 7,000/ - towards the Suddhi expenses and transportation charges. Thus, the total compensation payable by the appellant was assessed at Rs. 1 lakh. It is not known whether Insurance Company has challenged the order or not. Therefore, their liability to the extent of paying 50% of the amount as directed by the Tribunal is not necessarily to be considered in this appeal. 6. Mr. Mohanty, learned Advocate appearing for the Insurance Company has contended that since the driver of the offending trekker did not possess the requisite driving licence, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay such compensation.This aspect has been dealt with at length by the learned Tribunal. The driver possessed a light motor vehicle licence which includes to drive the offending trekker. Thus, the objection raised by the Insurance Company has no substance. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I find there is no legal of factual infirmity in the judgment so as to be interfered with it. Accordingly, the appellant shall deposit Rs. 1 lakh along with interest @ 9% from the date of application till such deposit is made within three months from the date. They are at liberty to withdraw Rs. 25,000/ - along with interest accrued thereon, which is lying with the Registrar of this Court. If such deposit is made, 90% of the amount shall be utilised in short term deposit for five years in favour of the claimant -respondents. 8. With the above directions the appeal and the cross -appeal are dismissed. Appeal and cross appeal dismissed.