Ram Krishna Gautam, J. - (1.) This First Appeal From Order u/s 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, has been filed by appellant Shriram General Insurance Company Limited through its Regional Manager against Gaffar Khan and three others, challenging validity and correctness of judgment and order dated 14.3.2014 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Moradabad, in M.A.C.P. No. 47 of 2012, Gaffar Khan and another Vs. Akeel Ahmad and others, with this contention that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the facts and law placed before it.
(2.) In the earlier award dated 15.2.2013 the claimants were awarded compensation against which proceeding was taken and the alleged occurrence of accident was not established on the basis of material on record. Involvement of Truck bearing registration number U.P. 21N 3615 (hereinafter referred as vehicle in question) was not established on the basis of evidence on record. Death of Firoz Khan occurred in the alleged accident was wrongly held by the Tribunal. Driver of the vehicle in question was not driving the same rashly and negligently resulting the above accident. Finding of Tribunal was based on surmises and conjectures, rather the alleged accident occurred due to sole negligence on the part of Firoz Khan, who was motorcycle driver and was driving motorcycle rashly and negligently. Moreso, it may be a result of contributory negligence on the part of deceased Firoz Khan, but no consideration was made. Eyewitness account of the accident was not trustworthy. His presence on the spot was doubtful. Unexplained delay in lodging F.I.R. was there. Findings over issue nos. 1 and 2 were erroneous as per law propounded in United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Anbari and others, 2000 10 SCC 523. Claimants- respondents 1 and 2 ought to have proved the reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit, if the deceased had lived, as a condition precedent propounded by Hon'ble Apex Court in Kaushalya Devi Vs. Sri Karan Arora and others, 2007 3 TAC 16 (SC) and Narendra Tandon Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and others, 2002 1 ACC 515 (DB).
(3.) Instant case was death of a minor, hence lump sum amount has to be awarded. There was nothing on record to prove the age of the deceased or employment and income of the deceased, whereas notional income of Rs. 3000/- has been fixed on assumption. Hence this appeal with request for setting aside the impugned Award.;