Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) THIS FAFO filed by the appellant Insurance company is directed against the judgment and award dated 15.1.2015 passed by Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 19, Allahabad, in M.A.C. No. 770 of 2006 awarding a sum of Rs. 9,23,140/ - alongwith simple interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. The application claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 12,50,000/ - was made by the claimant -respondents on the allegations that on 19.6.1997, Shri Jagnnath Yadav, predecessor -in -interest of the claimant -respondents was travelling from Phulpur to Allahabad by Commandar Jeep No. UP70 G 1039, and at about 9.30 p.m., when it reached near P.S. Tharwai, a Tata 407 Bus bearing No. UP70 B 9441, which was being driven rashly and negligently, hit the Commandar Jeep, in which Jagannath Yadav and other occupants received serious injuries and Jagnnath Yadav expired during his treatment at the Gandhi Memorial Associate Hospital, Lucknow. A First Information Report of the accident was also lodged with P.S. Tharwai, which was registered as Case Crime No. 191/97 under sections 279, 337 and 338, I.P.C. and later on after death of Jagannath Yadav, section 304 -A, I.P.C. was also added. It was further pleaded that deceased Jagannath Yadav was employed as Constable in the U.P. police and was aged about 38 years and his monthly salary was Rs. 4404/ -. Both the vehicles involved in the accident were insured by the appellant -Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
(2.) AFTER considering the evidence adduced by the parties, oral as well as documentary, Tribunal returned a finding that the deceased Jagannath Yadav was in a permanent job as a police constable in U.P. Police and his age was less than 40 years and at the time of death, his monthly income was Rs. 4,509/ -. The Tribunal also added 50% of the income towards future prospects for determining the compensation as the deceased was aged less than 40 years and applying a multiplier of 15, determined a sum of Rs. 9,13,140/ -. A sum of Rs. 5,000/ - was awarded towards material loss and Rs. 5,000/ - towards funeral etc. In this manner, a total compensation of Rs. 9,23,140/ - was awarded alongwith 7% interest per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of actual payment. Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that 50% of the salary has wrongly been added for future prospects in determining the compensation. It has also been submitted that Tribunal has erred in allowing the future prospect, inasmuch as Rule 220 -A of Motor Vehicles Rules came into force on 26.9.2011 while the accident took place in 1996. It is further contended that the Rule is prospective and shall apply only in cases, where the accident took place on or after 26.9.2011 and not where the accident took place before the said date. It is next submitted that since the insurance company was subsequently impleaded in the proceedings, as such, the Tribunal is not justified in awarding interest to the claimants with effect from the date of filing of the claim petition.
(3.) WE have considered the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the record.;