BIBI ROSHAN ARA Vs. KEDAR PRASAD AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH consent of parties, this appeal has been heard for final disposal at this stage itself.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the 7th Additional District and Sessions Judge Cum -Additional Motor vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhagalpur in Claim Case No. 48 of 1996, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation by treating Rs. 6,660/ - as annual income of the deceased.

(3.) IT is submitted that even as per the requirement of law, as contained in the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, Rs. 15,000/ - per month (sic -annum?) is prescribed as notional income for compensation to those who had no income prior to accident in case of fatal and disability in non - fatal accidents. Thus, according to the learned Counsel for the Appellant, the Tribunal has communed error in finding Rs. 6,660/ - as annual income of the deceased and that too without there being any evidence on record in support thereof. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has further submitted that the Tribunal has also committed error in awarding interest not from the date of filing of the claim petition and erroneously held the claimant to be entitled to get interest from the month of February, 1999 on the plea that there was delay in producing the witness on behalf of the claimant. It is submitted that, in fact, there is no delay on the part of the claimant. But besides this, the Tribunal was never prevented from disposing of the claim petition. According to the earned Counsel for the Appellant, even assuming that the claimant did not produce any witness, the Tribunal was not prevented from proceeding to decide the matter on the basis of the evidence/materials already on record. It is, thus, submitted that on the above both counts, the impugned judgment and award is bad in law and also on facts.