MEENA DEVI Vs. MANVINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurance Company as well as the Claimants have filed the appeals challenging the award of the Tribunal. The accident in this case happened on 04.10.2003. One Brijesh Yadav, 27 years old, Lance Naik in Indian Army, died in the accident. When he travelling on motor cycle, he was hit due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus insured with the appellant Insurance Company. On his death, his wife aged 26 years, three minor children (aged 6 years, 2 years and 1 year) and father aged 50 years filed a claim petition. They claimed a sum of Rs.45.00 lacs. In support of the claim, the salary certificate was marked as Exhibit A1 and oral evidence was tendered by the wife as well as Hawaldar Sreejithk to speak about the income of the deceased.

(2.) The issue in relation to negligence on the part of the driver of the bus who caused the accident and the liability of the driver, owner and insurance company to compensate the dependents is not seriously disputed. Both the Insurance Company as well as the claimants are appealing only in relation to quantum while the Insurance Company?s plea is for reduction, the claimants seek enhancement.

(3.) On the issue of compensation, the Tribunal based on the testimony of the wife of the deceased and PW - Hawaldar Sreejithk came to hold that the deceased was 27 years of age and he was drawing a gross salary of Rs.7761/ - per month. The Tribunal, however, took the basic pay, DA and CEA alone for the purpose of determining the pecuniary loss to the dependents. Therefore, the income at the time of death was taken as Rs.5908/ - per month and considering the future prospects, applying the decision of Sarla Dixit and anr. Vs. Balwant Yadev and ors., 1996 ACJ 581, the pecuniary loss of dependency for the purpose of determining compensation was fixed at Rs.5908 x 3 w 2 = Rs.8862/ - of which 1/3rd was deducted as personal expenses of the deceased resulting in determining the pecuniary loss at Rs.5908/ - per month and thereafter, applying multiplier 16, the compensation determined is as follows: