- (1.) This is an appeal directed by Chandigarh Transport Undertaking against the award dated 7.11.1996 passed by Sh. B.C. Rajput, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar, vide which the claim petition preferred by the parents and sister of deceased Gurdip Singh, was partly accepted and a sum of Rs. 2,70,000/- was allowed. Learned counsel for the appellants has challenged the award on two grounds, firstly that multiplier of 16 has been applied keeping in view the age of the deceased as 27 years. It is submitted that as per authority reported as Shakti Devi vs. New India Insurance Co. Ltd. and another, 2010 4 RCR(Civ) 950, the age of the parents is relevant factor for applying the multiplier. It is submitted that claimant Gurdial Singh has stated his age as 50 years and multiplier be applied accordingly.
(2.) The second contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that the Tribunal itself has held that there is contributory negligence. So, in these circumstances, the amount should have been deducted to the extent of 25%. To support this contention, learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the authority reported as T.O. Anthony vs. Karvarnan and others,2008 3 PunLR 462.
(3.) In reply to the above noted submission, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in the grounds of appeal it is nowhere mentioned that age of the parents is to be considered for applying the multiplier. The multiplier has been rightly applied. It is further contended that deceased was not at all negligent. The finding of the Tribunal in this regard are not correct. It is further contended that the driver of the offending vehicle could have averted the accident and in view of authority reported as Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs. Shri Laxman Iyer and another,2004 1 PunLR 446, it is argued that finding regarding contributory negligence be set aside and it be held that accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending bus.;