ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MUKHTYARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurance Company has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for challenging the award dated 4.1.2013 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palwal.

(2.) In relation to the death of Satyadev @ Bulbul in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 5.2.2009, his parents Smt. Mukhtyari and Puran Chand and three minor sisters, namely, Reena, Rukmani and Manisha filed a claim-petition under Sections 166/140 of the Motor Vehicles Act for grant of compensation to the tune of L 30,00,000/-. Smt. Lachho @ Pinki, wife of deceased Satyadev, was arrayed as respondent No.4 in the claim-petition, as in the meantime, she had got remarried. The Tribunal, while passing the impugned award accepted the claim petition only in respect of the parents of the deceased by awarding them a sum of L 5,60,000/- as compensation which they could recover from the driver, the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle jointly and severally. No compensation was awarded to the minor sisters of the deceased and also to his widow Smt. Lachho @ Pinki.

(3.) Counsel for the appellant has submitted that as Smt.Lachho @ Pinki had got remarried after the death of her husband Satyadev, then in that situation, the Tribunal should have taken into consideration the age of the parents of the deceased and not of the deceased himself in finding the suitable multiplier to be applied in assessing the compensation amount. However, this argument does not cut any ice as on the relevant date, i.e. date of the accident, Smt. Lachho @ Pinki was staying in the house of deceased Satyadev as his wife. In the event of the accident not taking place, she would have normally lived with her husband in his house as his wife for her remaining life. Therefore, while assessing the compensation amount, the Tribunal was justified in taking into consideration the age of the deceased and not the age of his parents.