LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-77

PARASMAL OSWAL Vs. GURUCHARAN SINGH

Decided On July 13, 2006
PARASMAL OSWAL Appellant
V/S
GURUCHARAN SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a claimants' appeal against the award dated 18. 8. 1993 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pali in Claim Case No. 2/1991 seeking enhancement over the compensation amount of Rs. 2,53,750/- awarded by the Tribunal on account of accidental death of Rajendra Kumar, aged 25 years, brother of appellant No. 1, son of appellant No. 2 and husband of appellant No. 3.

(2.) BRIEF facts relevant for determination of the questions involved in this appeal are that on 17. 9. 1990 deceased Rajendra Kumar while repairing his moped in front of Rotary Building at Pali was hit by a truck bearing registration No. PAT 8619. The truck run over the deceased who expired for the injuries sustained in the accident. The claimants pointed out the age of deceased at 25 years and his earning at about Rs. 4000/- per month from his independent business. Stating losses on various heads, the claimants claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 26 lacs. The claim was put to contest by the insurer, inter alia, on the ground that deceased was trying to repair his vehicle on a busy road and the accident occurred for the negligence of deceased himself and that the truck driver as well as the deceased were not holding valid driving licence. The learned Tribunal framed the following issues for determination of the questions involved in the case:- *********

(3.) THE Tribunal has taken annual income of the deceased at Rs. 45,000/- on the basis of income tax return filed in the year 1989, that is about a year before the death of the victim. He was earning from any industry established by him and, therefore, adopting a figure of Rs. 45,000/- per annum towards income of the deceased cannot be said to be an estimation on higher side; rather that remains the bare minimum in view of the age of deceased at 25 years, who had all chances of future growth in income. However, learned Judge of the Tribunal has seriously erred in assessing the loss in relation to the widow of deceased and so also in relation to the mother of deceased.