R S T C Vs. SHIV KANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents No. 1 and 2 are wife and son of deceased Laxman Singh aged 28 years, who on 25.4.1985 at about 10.00 a.m. while going to Pali in Roadways bus bearing No. RSG -82 met an accident near Chungi Outpost, Sojat. While overtaking a truck, the respondent No. 1 Kalyan Singh drove the bus in such a rash and negligent manner that it collided with a truck, which was coming from the front direction, which ultimately led into death of deceased Laxman Singh. A claim was filed by the petitioners -respondents No. 1 and 2 Shiv Kanwar and Dinesh Singh against the appellant and respondents No. 3 to 5. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat vide judgment dated 3.1.1997 awarded the claim of Rs. 2,65,000/ - in favour of the petitioners -respondents No. 1 and 2 and against the appellant and respondents No. 3 to 5. Being aggrieved by the said award, the appellant respondent No. 3 preferred this appeal.

(2.) THE respondents No. 3 and 4 failed to appear before the Tribunal against whom ex -parte proceedings were taken. The appellant -respondent in the reply denied the allegation of the petitioners -respondents No. 1 and 2. On behalf of the petitioner -respondent, two witnesses were produced. No evidence was led on behalf of the appellant. The Tribunal after evaluating and analysing the evidence, documentary as well as oral, passed an award against the appellant and respondents No. 3 and 4 and in favour of the petitioners -respondents No. 1 and 2.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant argued that deceased Laxman Singh was Government employee in Mines and Geology Department as Nakedar and was having salary of Rs. 840/ - only. The Tribunal without any reason or base treated the said salary as Rs. 2,000/ - and by deducting 1/3rd of the income as his personal expenses, the multiplier of 15 was given which is against the statutory provision. There is no evidence either oral or documentary and the Tribunal without having power or authority suo -moto increased the salary of the deceased as Rs. 2,000/ - per month being against the statutory provision cannot be approved. A Government servant if earned definite amount of salary that alone should be treated as his income which is Rs. 840/ - per month. Moreso, the consortium of Rs. 50,000/ - has been awarded to the wife of the deceased which is on the exorbitant side, as the Statute provide a limit to it. Contrary to the Statute, it should not have been given. The love loss compensation of Rs. 25,000/ - has also wrongly been given. The award given by the Tribunal is in excess in every head which requires curtailment as per norms and statutory provision.