VIMLA DEVI Vs. CHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order/award dated 6.4.1990 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dausa, being aggrieved on the ground that the compensation awarded to the claimants -appellants is very less.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 8.12.1983 respondent No. 1 was driving tanker URT 531. The tanker hit the camel -cart and thereafter it struck to the coming truck No. RJR 5167. Deceased Shankar Singh, driver of the truck No. RJR 5167, sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Claimants -appellants are the wife, sons and daughter of deceased Shankar Singh. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that Shankar Singh deceased sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of the tanker. Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that Shankar Singh was earning Rs. 1,000/ - per month as salary at the time of sad demise. Tribunal also came to the conclusion that Shankar Singh might have spent Rs. 400/ - per month towards his family members. Tribunal after considering the evidence awarded Rs. 1,30,000/ - in all to Vimla Devi, wife, Rs. 7,200/ - to Bahadur Singh and Rs. 8,400/ - to Lal Singh and Rs. 9,600/ - to Kumari Chitra. The Tribunal was also of the view that the claimants (Sic. deceased) might have lived up to the age of 65 years in the normal course. Thus, the multiplier was taken as 40 years and it was considered that the petitioner might have been maintained for only 40 years more. As far as the question of multiplier of the children is concerned, for Bahadur Singh the multiplier has been taken as 12 years and for Lal Singh the multiplier has been taken as 14 years and for Kumari Chitra multiplier has been taken as 16 years. It was considered by the learned Tribunal that the children might have received the dependency expenses only upto the age of 18 years and so the multiplier was 18 minus the existing age.

(3.) MR . Bhartiya has also cited before me the case of Makbool Ahmed v. Bhura Lal 1986 ACJ 219 (Rajasthan). My brother Vyas, J., was considering the question of remarriage and held that the compensation should be paid only upto the date of remarriage and for the parents the multiplier was considered as 15 years. This case does not help Mr. Bhartiya in the facts and circumstances of the case in any way. However, I will like to observe that the Constitution of India guarantees equal treatment and particularly Article 15 of the Constitution read with preamble of the Constitution. Chapter IV of the Constitution directs the court and the Government to provide equality of opportunity, equality of status and to give special facilities and concession to the weaker class of the society, namely, the women. The days when the widow remarriage was prohibited have gone and after coming into force of the Hindu Marriage Act and Hindu Succession Act, the doctrine of limited case also lost its ground. Widow has a right to remarry and it is in the interest of the society that remarriage of the young lady should be encouraged and the court should not be an impediment because of the old traditional approach, where the power vested in the man and the females were considered as the second class members. For this purpose, Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 also provides the right of absolute ownership to a woman and I am of the view that to say that on account of the remarriage or possibility of remarriage deduction of compensation will be against the spirit of the Constitution and will put a check on the remarriage system provided under various legislations enacted by the Parliament and the State Assembly. I am in disagreement on this point that there should be any impediment or restriction, directly or indirectly, compelling a woman not to remarry. On the contrary, an incentive should be given for remarriage for the preservation of better society. After remarriage generally a woman does not get the same status and benefits of decent life as she used to get earlier. Public feeling requires that there shall not be any deduction on account of possibility of remarriage.