RASIA KHATOON Vs. SUNIMAL KANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals arise out of the award dated 28.7.2005 passed by the learned 1st Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Keonjhar in M.A.C. Case No.231 of 1995 awarding compensation of Rs.51,300/ - to the claimant - petitioner with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the application. The accident occurred on

(2.) 7.1995. While the deceased was travelling by one Trekker, the vehicle had a head on collusion with one Truck coming from the opposite direction. The deceased died as a result of that accident. He was 25 years old at the time of his death. The claim application was filed against the insured owners and the insurers of both the vehicles. Finding that due to the negligence of the drivers of both the vehicles the accident occurred learned Tribunal has made both the Insurance Companies equally liable to pay the compensation. 2. Being aggrieved, the claimant has preferred M.A.C.A. No.865 of 2005 on the grounds that the evidence on the monthly income of the deceased was not taken into consideration, that instead of deducting 1/3rd of the monthly income towards the personal expenses of the deceased, who was a bachelor, the learned Tribunal has made deduction of 50% of the income, that application of multiplier of 13 is inappropriate and that the award towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium is too low.

(3.) THE impugned award reflects that there was prevaricating statements on the income of the deceased. Therefore, the learned Tribunal did not accept the oral evidence. Observing that the deceased was an able bodied man, aged about 25, the Tribunal concluded that he was capable of earning at the rate of Rs.1,000/ - per month. Taking that to be the monthly income of the deceased, the learned Tribunal further held that the contribution to the family made by the deceased was at the rate of Rs.300/ - per month. Thus, the annual loss of dependency was worked out at Rs.3,600/ -. This determination of the monthly income as well as contribution to the family by way of guess work appears to be on the lower side. If there were no convincing evidence on the monthly income of the deceased then the learned Tribunal ought to have taken the annual notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/ - as per the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.