- (1.) RAJEEV Gupta, C. J. This is insurer's appeal against the Award dated 23-01-2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/lst Addl. District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 36 of 2004.
(2.) CLAIMANTS Smt. Seema Rani and Eshan Chawala, who are widow and mi nor son of deceased Vijay Kumar Chawala, claimed compensation of Rs. 11,15,000/- for his death in the motor accident on 04-12- 2003, when his mo torcycle was dashed by the offending vehicle Tata Sumo bearing registration No. DL4c-F-8242 resulting in serious in juries to Vijay Kumar Chawala, who suc cumbed to those injuries during the course of his treatment in the hospital. On the report of the accident by eye-wit ness Pankaj Chawala, a case was regis tered against the driver of the offending vehicle Tata Sumo at Police Station Gadarpur at Crime No. 376 of 2003 for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304 of the I. PC. The claimants pleaded that deceased Vijay Kumar Chawla was run ning a Photo Studio and was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. The insurer and owner of the of fending vehicle Tata Sumo contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The owner of the offending vehicle pleaded that the driver of Tata Sumo was not re sponsible for the accident and the acci dent occurred due to the sole negligence of the deceased Motorcyclist himself. The insurer, on the other hand, pleaded that the driver of Tata Sumo was not holding a valid driving license and the Tata Sumo was being plied in breach of the policy conditions. The claimants examined PW1 Smt. Seema Rani and PW2 Pankaj Chawla in support of their claim, whereas the driver-cum-owner of Tata Sumo examined himself as DW1 in re buttal. The insurer, however, did not ex amine any witness.
(3.) THE Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, held that deceased Vijay Kumar Chawla died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident; the accident oc curred due to the sole negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle Tata Sumo; and, as the offending vehicle Tata Sumo was insured with United In dia Insurance Company Ltd. , the Insur ance Company was liable to pay com pensation to the claimants. Considering the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased, including his Income Tax Re turn, the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs. 60. 000/- per annum. By deduct ing l/3rd of the said amount as the per sonal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs. 40,000/- per annum. By multiplying the above amount of Rs. 40,000/- with the appropriate multiplier and by award ing amount under the other permissible heads, the Tribunal, in all, awarded com pensation of Rs. 7,27,000/- to the claimants. Interest @ 6% per annum on the above amount of compensation was also awarded from the date of the Award till the date of actual payment.;