NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. JAWAHAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ROHIT Bhat, a student of 3rd year MBBS, died in a vehicular accident because of negligent driving of Matador No. JK 02-J 4943 on 5.10.1998. A claim application was filed by the parents of the deceased before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu, claiming a sum of Rs. 14,94,180 as also an amount of Rs. 50,000 under no fault liability, with 24 per cent interest from the date of death till payment. The learned Tribunal, after conducting an inquiry into the matter, vide its award dated 12.1.2002, held the claimants entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 2,72,000 as compensation. National Insurance Co. Ltd. the appellant herein, was directed to satisfy the award. Interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum was also awarded in favour of the claimants. It was further directed that out of total award amount, a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 shall be kept in a fixed deposit in the name of the claimants in their joint account for a period of five years and the rest of the award amount was ordered to be paid to them through crossed cheque.

(2.) CLAIMANTS, being not satisfied with the award amount, filed civil first miscellaneous appeal before this court which was registered as C.I.M.A. No. 117 of 2002. Learned single Judge vide judgment dated 2.2.2009 directed that notional income of deceased would be deemed to be Rs. 4,000 per month. Learned single Judge, however, reduced the multiplier from 17 to 13. The learned single Judge, accordingly, ordered for payment of Rs. 4,70,000 as compensation instead of Rs. 2,72,000, as awarded by the Tribunal. Learned single Judge also awarded damages on account of pain and suffering to the tune of Rs. 50,000.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for appellant has, in fairness, stated that enhancement of notional income of deceased to Rs. 4,000 per month is just and proper and, accordingly, he submitted that he does not challenge this part of the impugned judgment. The learned counsel, however, submitted that the direction of the learned single Judge for payment of an amount of Rs. 50,000 on account of pain and suffering, is illegal, as neither any claim has been made by the claimants on account of pain and suffering in their claim petition nor had the Tribunal passed any award on this count. LEARNED counsel further submitted that in a death case, in terms of Second Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the general damages in case of death allowed in favour of the claimants is restricted to funeral expenses, loss of consortium, if beneficiary is the spouse, loss to estate and medical expenses. LEARNED counsel thus submitted that the amount of Rs. 50,000 awarded on account of pain and suffering, could not be awarded to the claimants.