JAGJEET SINGH Vs. UNITED INSURANCE CO. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of LPAC Nos. 17 and 18 of 2006 emerging from a common judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court. One of the appeals has been filed by the Insurance Company, whereas the other has been filed by the owner of the bus bearing registration No. JKP-8295. Facts are not in dispute. On 17.08.1986, deceased Mohd. Rafiq, a resident of town Bhalla took out his motorcycle to travel to Doda. After travelling some distance from his home town Bhalla, he saw a bus bearing Registration No. JKP/8295 approaching from opposite side at a high speed. He tried his best to save himself by shifting on the narrow single road, but the bus hit him. He was crushed below the right wheel of the vehicle along with his motorcycle. He could be removed from beneath the wheel of the bus only after lifting the bus with the help of a jack. He succumbed to the injuries while being taken to the hospital at Doda. The Tribunal recorded its finding that petitioner-Khair-ud-Din was the legal representative and dependent of the deceased. The authenticity of the accident is not in doubt. It has further been found that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. It was further found that the salary of the deceased at the time of his death was Rs. 1322.40. He was found to be earning an average amount of Rs. 7000/- per month by granting increments and future promotions. By applying the multiplier of 20, the following award was passed for a total sum of Rs. 3.70 lacs minus the amount of interim compensation which stood paid to the dependent. The aforesaid amount was to be shared in the ratio as given under:

(2.) The amount was to be paid by the Insurance Company namely United India Insurance Company along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of institution of the claim petition.

(3.) Against the aforesaid award, appeal was filed and the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 05.05.2006 has held that the appellant-Insurance Company was not entitled to contest the claim petition on the ground other than the one available to it under the Motor Vehicles Act because the Insurance Company did not seek required permission of the Tribunal. It was further held that the question of quantum could also not be raised by the Insurance Company as it did not fall within the permissible defenses available to an Insurer.