UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MEENA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against judgment and award dated 3.9.1998 passed by 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram in Motor Vehicles Claim Case No. 22/98. The appellant - Insurance Company is aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award by which it has been directed to pay a net compensation of Rs. 2,53,260/ - only to the respondents which include wife, children and father of the deceased, Satendra Prasad Gupta.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has not challenged the maintainability of the claim case or the finding that Satendra Prasad Gupta died in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 9.11.1996 at about 12 noon at village Amra Talab on G.T. Road due to rash and negligent act of the Driver of the Truck No. - '' '' -. Learned counsel for the appellant did not contest the liability of the Insurance Company to pay the legally payable compensation to the claimants -respondents.

(3.) IN the facts of the case, it appears that learned Tribunal has rightly calculated the annual dependency of the claimants as Rs. 17,280/ - only. The dispute between the parties is mainly with regard to selection of a just and proper multiplier. According to learned counsel for the appellant, keeping in view the judgments of the Apex Court reported in the case of Susamma Thomas reported in 1994 (2) SCC 176 (G. M., Kerala S.R.T.C. vs. Susamma Thomas) and in the case of Trilok Chandra, reported in 1996 (4) SCC 362 (U.P. S.R.T.C. vs. Trilok Chandra), the choice of multiplier is required to be determined not only on the basis of age of the deceased (or that of the claimants whichever is higher) but also by the calculation as to what actual sum, if invested at a rate of interest appropriate to a stable economy, would yield the annual dependency by way of annual interest. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the correct multiplier in this case should be 10.