NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MEERIA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Misc. appeal has been field by National Insurance Company. It was one of the defendants in M.V. Case No. 21/90.

(2.) ONE Meena Devi filed the aforesaid case under the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the death of her husband who was driver of one Ramdayal Singh. The husband of Meena Devi died while driving the Jeep of Ramdayal Singh. On the evidence on record contested by Ramdayal Singh, the Court held that the deceased was having monthly income of Rs. 1,000.00 and he died at the age of 30 years in good health, Learned lower Court also computed the period of survival of the deceased at 60 years which, normal and average life span of a citizen of this country by established norms. So the learned lower Court (Claims Tribunal) calculated compensation to be paid to Meena Devi on the basis of monthly income of Rs. 1000.00 for the period of 30 years which was the survival period of the deceased and assessed the amount of compensation at a lump sum of Rs. 3,60,000.

(3.) SO far as maintainability of the case before the Claims Tribunal concerned, I am to reference Sec. 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988I am reproducing the provisions of the aforesaid section. Notwithstanding any thing contained in the Workmen 'sCompensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), Where the death of, or bodily injury to, any person gives rise to claim for compensation under this Act and also under the Workmen 'sCompensation Act, 1923, the person entitled to compensation may without prejudice to the provision of Chapter X, claim such compensation under either of them Acts, but not under both. So under the aforesaid provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, claimant was entitled to maintain a claim case before the Tribunal as also before the Commissioner of Workmen 'sCompensation Act. The claim before the Tribunal was, therefore, very well maintainable. Now so far the plea that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased, lower Court on the basis of the evidence held that the accident occurred without any fault on the part of the deceased. This question cannot be raised here now because no error was pointed but so far the finding of the lower Court to this effect is concerned. So far as quantum of compensation is concerned, I find that the Tribunal assessed the age of the deceased at the established average age of 60 years and then computed the question of compensation amount by multiplying monthly income of Rs. 1,000.00 to 30 years which was remaining period of life span of the deceased. So amount of compensation was assessed by a simple method without using any multiplier.