CHULHAN PRASAD Vs. AMRENDRA KUMAR DWIVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Sanjay Singh, who has appeared on behalf of Opp.Party no.2/ Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on limitation petition i.e. on LA. No. 6532 of 2010 as well as on Memo of Appeal.

(2.) The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred against the order/Judgment dated 12.03.2010 passed by the 9th Addl.District Judge-cum- Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Saran at Chapra{ hereinafter referred to as "the Claims Tribunal") in Claim Case No.45/2000 for enhancement of compensation amount. The appeal has been preferred after expiry of 153 days from the date of limitation.

(3.) On 12.08.1999 one Dudhnath Prasad, a minor boy died in a vehicular accident. In the accident, the offending vehicle was a bus bearing Registration No. BHD-1619. Thereafter, an F.I.R. vide Dighwara P.S. Case No.79 /99 was registered and after investigation chargesheet against driver of the offending bus for rash and negligent driving was submitted. The mother and father of the deceased initially filed a petition claiming compensation under the provision of M.V.Act. However, during the pendency of the claim case, both died and thereafter two younger brothers of the deceased, who are appellants before this Court, were substituted. The learned Claims Tribunal considering the age of the deceased as 16 years adopted multiplier of 16 as per Schedule-II of the M.V.Act and allowed the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 1,60,000/-. Besides this Rs.2000/- was allowed as funeral expenses. Keeping in view the fact that the deceased was a minor child of 16 years , notional income as prescribed in the M. V.Act i.e. Rs.15,000/- was taken into account and after deducting 1/3rd from the said amount , the compensation amount was calculated and directed to be paid. During the pendency of the claim case interim compensation under Section 140 of the M.V. Act was allowed to the claimants and Rs.50, 000/- was paid. The said amount was directed to be deducted from the compensation amount i.e. Rs.1, 62,000/- and thereafter total amount of compensation i.e. Rs.1, 12,000/- was directed to be paid to the claimants along with 6 % interest from the date of filing of the claim case. The claim case was filed in the year 2000 itself. During the course of argument, it was submitted by Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent no.2/ insurer that total compensation amount with interest in compliance with the Judgment of the Claims Tribunal had already been paid to the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the learned Claims Tribunal has erroneously rejected the claim of the appellants to the extent that the deceased was earning Rs.6000/- per month by doing business of sweets and tea. He submits that the calculation should have been done as per his monthly income i.e. Rs.6000/- , but without any reason the learned Claims Tribunal has rejected the claimed income of Rs.6000/- of the deceased and granted compensation as per the notional income of Rs.15,000/-. On this ground, it has been prayed to modify the Judgment and enhance the compensation amount.