- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned award and also the papers filed alongwith the memo of appeal. Challenge in this appeal is to the award dated 6.11.2012, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Mathura in M.A.C.P. No. 497 of 2011, whereby the compensation of Rs. 1,88,648.00 together with simple interest at the rate of 7% per annum has been awarded to the claimants/respondent No. 1 and 2.
(2.) It appears that in the accident dated 4.3.2011 the driver of Motor cycle U.P. 88-AA 2163 owned by Smt. Nanno Devi, respondent No. 4 (wrongly and incorrectly mentioned as respondent No. 2 in the memo of appeal) driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and knocked down pedestrian Pooran Singh, who later on died in Pushpanjali Hospital, Agra on 13.3.2011 on account of the fatal injuries in the accident. It was alleged that the deceased aged about 58 years and was earning Rs. 5000/- per month from the Agriculture and animal husbandry. The claimants being his sons and legal representatives filed claim petition for an award of Rs. 18.25 lack. The driver and owner of the vehicle denied the accident with motor-cycle No. U.P. 85 AA- 2163. It was further alleged that the FIR of the accident was lodged 24 days after the accident against the driver of the motor-cycle U.P. 85-2365 and by way of amendment registration number of the motor-cycle has been amended during pendency of the claim petition. The appellant being insurer of the aforesaid motor cycle reiterated the contention of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 further stating that the motor cycle was not insured with them and its driver has no valid and effective driving licence. The claimants adduced oral and documentary evidence. Opposite party No, 1 filed verification report of his driving licence. However, the opposite parties did not lead any oral evidence in the case. The Tribunal after hearing the parties counsel has held that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the motor-cycle U.P. 85-AA-2163 by its driver and the deceased succumbed to the injuries in the hospital at Agra on 13.3.2011. The Tribunal further held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the FIR and incorrect mentioning of registration number of the motor cycle has been sufficiently explained through the testimony of Murari Lal PW 1 and Ashok Saini (eye-witness) PW 2. The issues regarding insurance of the motor-cycle with the appellant insurance of the motor-cycle with the appellant and non possessing of the valid driving licence by the driver of the motor-cycle on the date of accident were decided against the appellant. It was further held by the Tribunal that the claimants have spent Rs. 83,648.00 in the medical treatment of the deceased after the accident; that the deceased was aged 65 years; that his notional income was Rs. 3000/- per month and after deducting from his annual income using multiplier of '5' compensation of Rs. 90,000/- for the death of the deceased was awarded. Rs. 15000/- were further awarded to the claimants for funeral expenses and loss of estate. Since the motor cycle in question was insured with the appellant, so they were directed to indemnify the award.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the accident did not take place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of motor-cycle U.P. 85-AA- 2163, because in the FIR lodged 24 days after the accident the number of motor-cycle mentioned was U.P. 85-2365. He has further argued that the compensation awarded to the claimants is highly excessive and arbitrary as the claimants were not dependent upon the income of the deceased.;