MONORANJAN GHOSH Vs. LAXMI BARDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1984 (for short, MV Act) is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.7.2002 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura in TS(MAC) No. 370 of 1999.

(2.) Sri Amal Ghosh, son of the claimants-appellants, on 10.11.99 at 8.30 pm after completing his journey in the offending vehicle being No. TR-01-2516 (Commander Jeep), got down from the said vehicle at College Chowmuhani and stood by the side of the road and at that moment he was dashed by the said vehicle due to rash and negligent driving causing injury to him and due to said injury he died. The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the MV Act seeking compensation for the death of their son. According to the claimants, their son was aged about 18 years and his monthly income was Rs. 3,500/-. The total claim of the claimants was Rs. 5,52,667/-. Initially the claim was made against Smt. Laxmi Bardhan, the owner of the vehicle and the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Subsequently, it came to the notice of the claimants that the National Insurance Company Ltd., Agartala was the insurer of the said offending vehicle. Accordingly, the claim petition was amended impleading National Insurance Company Ltd. as opposite party No. 2 instead of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Both the opposite parties contested the claimants' claim by filing written objections. In support of their claim, the claimant-appellant No. 1 examined himself as PW 1. No witness was examined on behalf of the respondents. Having heard the parties and considering the evidence on record the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 1,62,000/- in favour of the claimants with interest thereon @ Rs. 9 percent from 4.2.2002 i.e. the date of receipt of the notice by the National Insurance Company Ltd. The said compensation included an amount of Rs. 2,000/- being funeral expense. In assessing the compensation, the learned Tribunal held that the deceased had no fixed income and as such accepted the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum. The said notional income was multiplied with the multiplier of 16 and the compensation was assessed deducting one-third from the total amount.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award the claimants have come up with this appeal seeking enhancement of the award on the ground that the learned Tribunal committed error by refusing to accept the monthly income of Rs. 3,000/- per month and by accepting the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum. It has also been contended on behalf of the appellants that the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal committed error by granting interest from 4.2.2002 i.e. the date of receipt of notice by the National Insurance Company Ltd., instead of the date of filing of the claim petition.