ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. DINESH PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the award passed by Sri Awadh Kishore Singh Chouhan, Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 9 of 1992, The respondent nos. 1 to 4 filed the aforesaid claim case 35. claiming compensation for one Pankaj Kumar Singh, Dharmendra Kumar Singh and Jitendra Kumar Singh, who were travelling by Bus No. BRL -3974 from Samastipur to Darbhanga. The aforesaid bus met with an accident as a result of which Pankaj Kumar Singh died and Dharmendra and Jitendra received injuries. Upon evidence adduced in the Tribunal, the trial judge granted Rs. 82,000/ - for injuries caused to Dharmendra and Jitendra who were minor boys and he also granted compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/ - for the death of Pankaj Kumar Singh, a boy aged 10 years. 5. 2 The Oriental Insurance Company is the only appellant before this Court and in course of argument, the compensation granted to the 10 years boy only was challenged. It was submitted before me that the Tribunal assessed the income of the 10 years boy to be Rs. 15,000/ - per annum, even without there being pleading to this effect. By using the multiplier ';15 ';, the amount of compensation has come to Rs. 2,25.000/ - and after deducting 1/3rd of this amount (Rs. 10 75,000/ -), the amount has been calculated by the Tribunal to be Rs. 1,50,000/ - and Rs. 2000/ - has been added to the same by calculating the amount of funeral expenses, etc. The appellant did not challenge the amount of compensation to the other minor boys who were injured in the alleged accident which was to the tune of Rs. 82,000/ -, a slump sum amount. So I also need not go into details of amount of compensation, as granted by the Tribunal for the injuries caused to 15. Dharmendra and Jitendra. 3. So far the compensation awarded to the claimants for the death of minor boy of 10 years, I think the Tribunal applied the principles as laid down by Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1994. However, in this case, the alleged accident had taken place on 17th June 1992 when M.V. Act 1988. was in force. The M.V. Act 1994 has not been made retrospective and the liabilities 20. occurring for an accident would be the liability on the date of accident. Normally, in a criminal case, the penalty to be imposed for an accident is according to the law applicable at the time of alleged accident. The civil liability would also, therefore, be deemed to be according to the law applicable at the time of accident. So unless M.V. Act 1994 was made operative retrospectively, the law applicable at the time of accident should be used for computing the amount of 25. compensation to be paid to the claimants for loss of the life of a minor boy, 10 years old. A boy of 10. years old was admittedly not having any income nor there was any pleading to this effect. So a lump sum amount should be paid in case of death of such a minor boy. In cases reported in 1998 (2) PLJR, at pages 616 and 617, this Court assessed the amount of compensation to be paid for the death of minor boys as Rs.50,000/ - (a lump sum). The Tribunal in this case calculated the amount 30. of compensation as per the M.V. Act 1994 which has perhaps been wrongly referred as M.V. Act 1968. I have already stated above that M.V. Act 1994 is not retrospectively operative and there being no provision in the M.V. Act 1988 regarding the assumption of income of a non -earning family member at Rs. 15,000/ - as given in schedule of the M.V. Act 1994, I am of the opinion that, of course, a lump sum amount for the death of minor should be the guiding principle in calculating 35. the amount of compensation to the claimants of deceased minors. 4. In the result, I am to hold that the amount of compensation fixed by the Tribunal for the death of Pankaj Kumar Singh at Rs. 1,50,000/ - added with funeral expenses of Rs. 2,000/ - has no statutory sanction. 5. So there is no alternative but to allow this appeal in part regarding the compensation allowed to 40. the claimants - respondent nos. 1 to 4 for the death of Pankaj Kumar Singh. The appellant shall pay Rs. 50,000/ - as lump sum for the death of Pankaj Kumar Singh to the claimants, plus Rs. 2,000/ - of the funeral expenses. There is no necessity to change the amount of interest awarded by the Tribunal. Whatever amount has been paid by the Insurance Company as interim compensation, shall be deducted from the amount fixed by this Court and then the rest shall be paid to the 45. claimants by the appellants. The compensation amount for the two injured, Dharmendra and Jitendra shall remain intact.