NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SHAHEEN BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-insurer has preferred this appeal in terms of Sec. 173 of Motor Vehicles Act 1988, assailing Award dtd. 31/3/2022 passed by Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal Ramban (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal"), in file No. 31/Claim titled "Shaheen Begum and Ors. v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Anr.", whereby compensation for an amount of Rs.29,05,000.00 along with interest @ 7.5% per annum was granted in favour of claimants/respondents No. 1 to 5, on account of death of one Shabir Ahmed husband of respondent No. 1, father of minor respondents No. 2 to 4 and son of respondent No. 5, who had died in a vehicular accident involving offending vehicle (Eeco) with temporary Registration No. BU-1076 driven by its owner-respondent No. 6-Mohd Rafiq Mugal, insured with the appellant-company, rashly and negligently.

(2.) Appellant-insurer has assailed the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, on the ground of quantum of compensation, pleading that Tribunal has wrongly accepted the monthly income of the deceased at an amount of Rs.15,000.00, on a plea raised by the respondents-claimants that the deceased was running a shop in Gool market, whereas, as per the ration card of the deceased, he had been shown as an agricultural labourer with a monthly income of Rs.2000.00 only and that the Tribunal, despite of being apprised of the said fact, instead had considered deceased as a shop keeper without any reason, much less a plausible reason; that at the most the Tribunal could have taken minimum income of the deceased as Rs.6000.00 per month in terms of SRO 17 issued by the Government, applicable to the minimum wages as on date of the accident. Lastly, the appellant prayed that appeal filed by it be allowed and impugned Award, being not maintainable, be set aside.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has, vehemently, argued that Tribunal had accepted the occupation of the deceased as shopkeeper and income therefrom as Rs.15,000.00 per month, on a shaky evidence, without taking into account the plea raised by the appellant-insurer that the deceased was an agricultural labourer with monthly income of just Rs.2,000.00 as per ration card issued in his favour. Tribunal has, thus, misdirected itself by accepting the income of the deceased as Rs.15,000.00 per month instead of Rs.2,000.00. He further argued that, at the most, the Tribunal could accept the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000.00 per month, as minimum wages which were applicable at the time of the death of the deceased as notified by the Government vide SRO 17. It was, accordingly, prayed that appeal be allowed and impugned Award be set aside.