GOPI KRISHNA KAKRANIA Vs. MAHENDRA PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both these appeals involve common question of law and fact, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The incident that gave rise to the cause of action for filing of the two claim petitions before M.A.C. Tribunal (South & West) against whose orders/awards both these appeals have been preferred in this court is a vehicular accident that occurred on Legship-Reshi Road, West Sikkim on 10.10.2003. It is stated that claimants' son and daughter-in-law who met with death in the said accident were travelling in the ill-fated vehicle which was on its way from Gyalshing to Siliguri on the fateful day. Claimants filed two claim petitions separately in respect of their deceased son late Praveen Kakrania and daughter-in-law late Pragati alias Anita Kakrania before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (South & West) at Namchi against Mahendra Pradhan, respondent No. 1 the owner of the vehicle and United India Insurance Co. Ltd., the respondent No. 2 with whom the vehicle was insured. The claim petition filed in respect of late Pragati alias Anita Kakrania the deceased daughter-in-law was registered as M.A.C.T. Case No. 6 of 2004. The opposite parties resisted the claim by filing separate written objections challenging the maintainability of the claim petition filed by the claimants. In his written objection, the respondent No. 1 contended that the vehicle in question was insured with the respondent No. 2 and that the claim for compensation, if any, lies against the insurance company only. In their written objection, the respondent No. 2 denied and disputed each and everything that 'shall be contrary to and inconsistent therewith from what shall transpire from records'. After recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,65,700 as compensation in the following manner. Para 16 of the impugned order which shows how the compensation was worked out is as follows:

(3.) The claim petition filed by the claimants in respect of Praveen Kakrania, the deceased son, was registered as M.A.C.T. Case No. 4 of 2004. The claim was resisted by the opposite parties more or less on the same ground as in the M.A.C.T. Case No. 6 of 2004 as already narrated above. After recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal granted an amount of Rs. 4,10,500 as compensation to the claimants following the same method of computation of the compensation as follows: