NATILNAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. BHARTI SOLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the appeal, the insurer of the vehicle involved in a fatal accident, having been accorded permission to contest the claim for compensation on merits, seeks to question the award dated 18. 3. 2006 made by the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, Bikaner, in claim Case No. 120 of 2005 on its quantification of compensation.

(2.) RELEVANT background facts are that on 19. 2. 2005 at about 3 p. m. the deceased sanjay Solanki, aged about 35 years, while riding his motor cycle was hit from behind by a truck bearing registration No. RJ 07-G 1457, insured with the appellant, belonging to Kheta Ram, non-applicant No. 1 and driven by Chunni Lal, non-applicant No. 2; the deceased sustained head injury and succumbed while on way to hospital. The wife and minor children of the deceased made a claim for compensation on account of accidental death of Sanjay Solanki in the sum of Rs. 97,90,808 against the driver, owner and insurer of the offending truck with the submissions, inter alia, that the deceased 36 years in age, was employed as Field Officer with Indian Oil Corporation, Bichhwal, Bikaner earning salary of rs. 29,906 per month; having prospects of promotion every 5 years and he is likely to have served for next 24 years. The owner and driver of the truck refuted the claim averments and also pointed out the liability of the insurer. The appellant insurer also denied the claim averments and alleged want of valid driving licence with the truck driver and that the accident occurred for negligence of the deceased himself.

(3.) AFTER framing of necessary issues and taking evidence the learned Judge of the tribunal held on issue No. 1 with reference to the unrebutted testimony of the eyewitness Ram Chandra and the documentary evidence produced by the claimants that the non-applicant No. 2 caused the accident with rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by hitting the motor cycle from behind and there was no contribution to the accident on the part of the deceased. While rejecting other objections of the insurer in issue No. 3 with reference to the driving licence of the truck driver produced on record, Exh. 13 and want of any evidence by the insurer, the learned Judge took quantification of compensation in issue No. 2. The learned Judge found from the payslip of the deceased for the month of January 2005 that he was receiving net rs. 18,100 per month after deductions from his salary of Rs. 29,906. Learned Judge found that deductions included Rs. 563 for scooter loan, Rs. 1,803 for society loan, interest on loan at Rs. 365, festival advance rs. 400 and furniture loan Rs. 84 and being part of income of the deceased, considered it proper to include them for the purpose of his net income and, therefore, took his monthly income at Rs. 21,315, deducted 1/3rd on his personal expenditure and with net dependency at Rs. 14,210 per month, took the multiplicand at Rs. 1,70,520 and capitalised by a multiplier of 16 to arrive at a pecuniary loss figure of Rs. 27,28,320. Learned Judge further allowed Rs. 20,000 to wife of the deceased towards loss of consortium and Rs. 10,000 to each of the two children towards loss of love, affection and guidance of their father and so also Rs. 5,000 for funeral expenses. The tribunal, therefore, made the award in the sum of Rs. 27,73,320 and allowed interest at the rate of 7. 5 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim application, i. e. , 27. 4. 2005.