JASBIR KAUR Vs. DARSHAL LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The deceased is Gurjant Singh, who was working as a Conductor on a private truck bearing registration No. PB-04-E-9764. The truck was proceeding from Jalandhar to Gauhati. On 14.09.1999 at about 8.30 a.m., the truck was re-fueling at a place known as Mehrona. The dealer of the Gas Station instructed the driver of the said truck to move it ahead but its way, was being blocked by a mini bus whose driver advised the driver of the truck to reverse the vehicle. While being reversed, the truck struck against a wall on which the deceased-Gurjant Singh was sitting. As a result of this accident, Gurjant Singh died. The present claim petition has been filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) The claimant is mother of the deceased, who was aged 25 years on the date of the accident and was unmarried. The only issue to be determined is whether the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ferozepur (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Tribunal') has determined the compensation correctly. Since, the petition has been filed under Section 163-A of the Act, there is no question of any fault involved herein. The learned Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- and has also found that he was 25 years old on the date of the accident. Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute these findings nor are they being disputed by the respondents. The learned Tribunal has calculated the compensation on the basis of the age of the claimant and not on the basis of the age of the deceased. This principle is being contested by the learned counsel for the appellant. She has further placed reliance on Schedule-II of the Act.

(3.) Being a petition under Section 163-A of the Act, the Second Schedule thereto will apply. Therefore, the compensation has to be determined on the basis of income of the deceased and his age at the time of the accident. A deduction of ⅓ is to be made from the compensation determined towards personal maintenance of the deceased. Compensation is also payable under the usual heads of funeral expenses, loss of consortium, loss of estate and medical expenses as provided in the said Schedule of the Act. No increase in the amounts provided under the said Schedule is permissible by the Courts and only the Central Government is entitled to amend the Second Schedule of the Act keeping in view the cost of living. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Deepal Girishbhai Soni and others v. United India Insurance Company Limited, 2004 (2) RCR (Civil), 466. The relevant observations from this judgment are reproduced below:-