SANTOSH DEVI Vs. SOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed against the Judgment/Award dt. 10.05.2004 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur in MAC No. 776/04, whereby in all Rs. 5,77,488/ - has been awarded as compensation to the claimants.

(2.) THE case of the claimants is that on 06.11.2001 Shri Chhote Lal was going on a motor -cycle bearing number RJ -29 -1 M -5499 towards Jaipur. When he reached near Ganesh Pipe Factory, Khokala, a Jeep bearing number RJ - 29 -P -0395, driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, came from opposite direction and hit the motor -cycle, resulting in severe injuries to Chhote Lal. On account of severe injuries; Chhote Lal died. In the claim petition it was stated that Shri Chhote Lal was employed in Army and was a young man of 23 years of age and was earning Rs. 5,658/ - p.m. It was also averred that deceased Chhote Lal was having bright future. In different heads compensation was sought of Rs. 59,84,000/ -. The owner and driver of the Jeep remained absent and they did not contest the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. The Insurance Company contested the claim and filed its written statement. The learned Tribunal framed necessary issues in the case. The claimant examined three witnesses namely; Smt. Santosh, Ashok and Kanhaiya Lal. Several documents were tendered in evidence. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The learned Tribunal decided three issues in favour of the claimant and while deciding issues No. 4 and 5 which were in relation to quantum of compensation in all awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,77,488/ - vide its award dt. 10.05.2004. Hence, this misc. appeal.

(3.) ON the other hand the learned Counsel for the opposite party has submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is a reasoned one and needs no interference by this Court. As regards the error committed by the learned Tribunal while making deduction of GPF amount from the total monthly income of the deceased for the purpose of making calculation and awarding compensation is concerned, is not disputed, in as much as that the learned Tribunal fell in error while reducing GPF amount for the purpose of calculation and awarding compensation.