BARKAT AND ORS. Vs. BANNA KHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants -claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of the impugned award dated 25.7.2009 passed by the MACT (Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 6 (MACT), District Dausa in claim case No. 206/2008(259/2008), whereby the Tribunal while partly allowing the claim of the claimants, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,47,000/ - as total compensation to the claimant -appellants.

(2.) THE brief facts as emerging on the face of record are that a claim petition came to be filed before the Tribunal alleging therein that on 4.2.2008 when deceased Nathya @ Nathu was going from Baniyana to Dausa in a Jeep bearing No. R.J.29 T.0564, as soon as they reached near Krishi Vigyan Kendra then the driver of the vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and jumped over the bridge due to that Nathya @ Nathu Khan fell down from the Jeep and received grievous injuries on account of which he died. A report in respect of the said incident was lodged at Police Station, Sadar Dausa upon which fir No. 53/2008 was registered and the vehicle was seized and after investigation challan was filed against non -petitioner No. 1 in the competent court. It was alleged that at the time of accident, Nathya @ Nathu's age was 48 years and was earning Rs. 5000/ - per month by doing work of driving. It was also alleged that the family was deprived of his income for all times to come. It was further alleged that at the time of accident, the non -petitioners No. 1 & 2 were driver and owner of the said vehicle and the vehicle bearing No. R.J.29 T.0564 was insured with non -petitioner No. 3 and claimed Rs. 40,58,000/ - as total compensation.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and the same being contrary to the facts available on record as well as illegal principles, therefore, the same is liable to be enhanced by this Court. He submitted that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the income of the deceased and only assessed income as Rs. 3000/ - per month, whereas he was earning Rs. 5000/ - per month by doing work of driver and in support this fact a driving licence (Ex. p/1) was produced before the Tribunal. He contended that the learned Tribunal without considering the number of dependents i.e. 6, deducted 1/3rd therefore 1/5th deduction has to be adopted towards personal expenses of the deceased. He further contended that the learned Tribunal has awarded very meagre amount on account of love and affection and consortium. He further contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in not allowing any amount on account of future prospect. He, therefore, prayed that the award passed by the learned Tribunal deserves to be enhanced suitably. The counsel relied upon judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Rajesh and Ors. v. Rajbir Singh and Ors. reported in : (2013) 9 SCC 54 and Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors. reported in : (2012) 6 SCC 421 and Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in : (2009) 6 SCC 121.