DARSHANU Vs. SHISHUPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement against the award dated 28.3.2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandi in Claim Petition No. 50 of 1997, awarding Rs. 1,06,000/ compensation to the claimant along with 9% per annum interest from the date of presentation of the petition i.e. 14.1.1997. The award amount has been ordered to be paid by New India Assurance Company Hamirpur, Insurer, of the vehicle.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the deceased Ranvir Singh was on board in truck bearing registration No. HIE 126 owned by respondent No. 1, insured with respondent No. 3 and was being driven by respondent No. 2 in rash or negligent manner, as a result of which the truck met with an accident on 15.2.1996 near village Chhang on Mandi Jogindernagar, National Highway. Ranvir Singh sustained multiple injuries and he succumbed to his injuries on 16.2.1996 in Civil Hospital, Jogindernagar. The deceased was a hale and hearty person of 22 years and was earning Rs. 5,000 per month as mason, band master and from agriculture. The appellant mother of the deceased filed claim petition, praying therein Rs. 6,00,000/ compensation on account of death of Ranvir Singh and Rs. 35,000/ on account of his treatment. The respondent No. 1 filed reply and has admitted that accident took place on 15.2.1996 but has submitted that he had instructed the driver, not to carry any passenger and in case he allowed any person to travel in the truck, he did the same in violation of the instructions given to him. He has submitted that truck is insured with insurer who is liable to indemnify the insured. The accident took place due to mechanical defect and not on account of rash or negligent driving on the part of the driver. Respondent No. 2 driver did not file any reply. The insurer in its reply has pleaded that the truck was being plied in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The carrying of passengers in goods vehicle is not permitted. The driver was not holding valid and effective driving licence to drive the truck at the time of accident. The insurer denied its liability to indemnify the insured.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Counsel for the respondents and gone through the record. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/ per month. The Tribunal has further committed an error by holding that loss to the appellant is Rs. 1000/ per month or Rs. 12,000/ per annum. The multiplier of 8 applied by the Tribunal in awarding the compensation is on the lower side. The learned Counsel representing the owner and driver have supported the impugned award and have submitted that Insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. The learned Counsel for the insurer has submitted that deceased was an unauthorized passenger in the truck and therefore, New India Assurance Company is not liable to indemnify the insured. He has submitted though the impugned award against the insurer has become final as no appeal has been filed by the New India Assurance Company, but even than no further liability can be put on the Insurance company in the appeal.