- (1.) HEARD the learned Advocates for the respective parties. The facts of the case very briefly are as follows:- The appellants filed an application for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 being M. A. C. No. 50 of 2004 in the Court of the learned Motor Accidents claims Tribunal concerned at Howrah. A sum of Rs. 14,40,000/- plus interest was claimed as compensation in the said application. The allegation in the said application was that on 16. 12. 2003 the victim was returning from Amtala along Diamond Harbour Road by riding his Motor bike and at about 10. 10 p. m. the offending Truck bearing Registration No. WBQ-5776, coming from the opposite direction, dashed the Motor bike of the victim, who is the husband of theappellant No. 1, father of the appellant Nos. 1 A, B and C and son of the appellant No. 2, and the victim died owing to the said accident. It was alleged in the said application thatthe victim was 35 years of age, the victim was a businessman and had a monthly income of Rs. 10,500/- and the victim was also an Income Tax payer. The said application for the compensation was contested by the respondent No. 1 (Insurance Company) but the said application was not contested by the owner of the offending vehicle, that is, the respondent No. 2.
(2.) THE learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, First Court, howrah by his judgment dated 29th August, 2005 allowed the said M. A. C. Case on contest against the Insurance Company and ex-parte against the owner of the offending vehicle. The respondent No. 1 was directed to issue two A/c Payee Cheques-one in the name of the appellant No. 2 to the tune of Ra. 20,000/- and another cheque in the name of the appellant No. 1 to the tune of Rs. 1,19,500/- within 40 days from the date of the judgment, failing which the amount would carry interest at the rate of 5% per annum till realisation. The learned Tribunal further give the direction, inter alia, that the appellant No. 1 shall invest Rs. 60,000/- (Rs. 20,000/- for each of the children of the victim) either in the Post Office or in a Nationalised Bank in any fixed deposit scheme or other scheme within one month from the date of receipt of the Account Payee Cheque. The learned Tribunal held that the driver of the offending Truck was rashly and negligently driving which caused the death of the victim.
(3.) THE learned Advocates who argued in the Appeal before us made their respective submissions on the question of quantum of compensation that could have been awarded to the claimants. The entire argument before this Court was restricted to the question of quantum of compensation that the learned Tribunal could have awarded in the present case. It appears from impugned judgment that a discrepancy has been recorded in so far as the age of the victim is concerned inasmuch as in the post mortem report the age has been shown as 35 years but the appellant No. 1 in her evidence stated that the age of the victim was 43 years at the time of the accident and the learned Tribunal relied upon the evidence of the appellant No. 1 and held that the age of the victim was 43 years at the time of the accident and the learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 13 in calculating the compensation.;