SANDESH KUMARI Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is admitted for hearing. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that looking to only two questions raised in the case, it can be disposed of at this stage only. Keeping in view this prayer, this matter has been taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Only two grounds have been raised by the learned counsel for the appellants in this case for allowing this appeal by enhancing the compensation. These are: (a) that proved age of the deceased Amar Singh at the time or accident is 41 years; and (b) multiplier of 8 needs to be enhanced again keeping in view the proved age of the deceased with interest from the date of filing of claim petition and not from the date of award. Though an attempt was made, on behalf of the respondents, by learned counsel to turn down both these pleas and consequently to dismiss this appeal, however, they were not able to satisfy the court on the basis of evidence, both oral and documentary, adduced in this behalf to accept their plea.

(3.) Vehicle bearing registration No. HP 01-1148 being owned by respondent No. 2, and being insured with respondent No. 1, insurance company is not in dispute. Similarly, no leave of the Tribunal was sought to contest the claim of appellants as per provisions of section 170 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. This is being mentioned, because in the absence of permission, defences of the respondent No. 1, insurance company are limited as contained in section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is also not in dispute that appellant No. 1 is the widow, appellant Nos. 2 to 5 are his children and the appellant No. 6 is the mother of the deceased Amar Singh. He was working as Assistant Sub Inspector in police at the time of the accident on 30.12.2000 when above vehicle met with an accident while it was on its way from Manali to Kelong. Both, driver as well as Amar Singh sustained fatal injuries in the accident.