SATYA BAGGA Vs. SUBHASH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of F.A.O. Nos. 1371 and 1467 of 1991 as these are directed against the same award of the Claims Tribunal passed in MACT Case No. 100 of 1989 on 9.9.1991. The original paper-book of F.A.O. No. 1467 of 1991 was burnt in fire. Learned counsel for the parties have made available a typed copy of paper-book of the said appeal, which is taken on record as original paperbook after reconstruction.

(2.) Om Parkash Bagga died in a road accident which took place on 4.9.1989. Claim Petition No. 100 of 1989 under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by his widow Satya Bagga and two sons claiming compensation for the death of Om Parkash. Learned Claims Tribunal after appreciating the evidence led by the parties came to the conclusion that the deceased was aged 53 years and was working as a Professor in Punjab University at the time of the accident. As per the salary certificate, Exh. A-4 produced in evidence, the deceased was drawing a gross salary of Rs. 6,585 per month at the time of the death. Claims Tribunal thus relying upon the salary certificate, Exh. A-4, came to the conclusion that in the face of that certificate there cannot be any doubt about the income of the deceased. After making deduction of 1/3rd, the dependency of the appellants was assessed at Rs. 4,000 per month. Claims Tribunal after observing that the deceased, who was 53 years of age at the time of the accident, would have retired at the age of 60 years, applied a multiplier of 7 and accordingly, awarded a compensation of Rs. 3,36,000 in favour of the claimants-appellants. Claims Tribunal, however, in the operative part of the award, ordered that this compensation shall be payable by all the three respondents, namely, Subhash Singh, Satish Kumar, the driver and owner respectively of the offending truck and the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. jointly and severally. It was further ordered that the liability of the insurance company shall be to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000 and the remaining amount of compensation of Rs. 1,86,000 would be payable jointly and severally by the driver and owner of the offending truck. The amount payable to each claimant was apportioned as detailed in the award.

(3.) F.A.F.O. No. 1371 of 1991 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation and F.A.F.O. No. 1467 of 1991 has been filed by Satish Kumar, the owner of the offending truck challenging the award of the Claims Tribunal. This is how both these appeals are being disposed of by a single order.