- (1.) The facts of the appeal are that a claim petition was filed by the appellants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur asserting that Smt. Prabhat Kanwar wife of Shri Shaitan Singh aged 30 years was on 24.5.1996 coming along with her sisters Hans Kanwar and Vimla Kanwar in a jeep no.RJ-06-T-0038. The jeep reached near the Harihar Bhojanalaya, Rampura, National Highway No.11 at 4.30 PM. When it stood on kachcha side of the road, a roadways bus came in a very fast speed being driven in a rash and negligent manner and hit the jeep, which was standing in kachcha, as a result of which, Hans Kanwar and Pratap Kanwar died on the spot, while Vimla died later on in the hospital. The police registered FIR against the driver and filed charge sheet. The Tribunal by the impugned award decided three claim petitions together. In the case of present appellants, claim case no.1021/1996 was allowed with direction to the respondent-RSRTC to pay to them a sum of Rs.2,00,000 as compensation together with interest @ 9% per annum. Feeing aggrieved thereby, the appellant have approached this Court by filing the appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation amount.
(2.) It was urged on behalf of the appellants that Tribunal has not correctly appreciated the statement of AW-1 Shaitan Singh and AW-4 Sumer Singh. Both of them have stated that Prabhat Kanwar was doing tailoring work and her house hold work at house and was earning Rs.30-40 per day from tailoring. Apart from that she was supporting her husband and family. It has been further contended that now a days, even a normal labourer used to earn Rs.2,000 per month and therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in granting a lump sum compensation of Rs.2,00,000. The Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier method at least accepting the income of the deceased to be Rs.2,000/- per month and also taking into consideration the future prospects. Nothing has been separately awarded under the head of pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, funeral expenses etc. Even the rate of interest on the amount of compensation has not been correctly awarded by the Tribunal.
(3.) None has appeared for the respondents for last two-three dates and even today also, therefore, the findings recorded in the award are taken as arguments on behalf of respondents and on that basis this Court proceeded to examine the matter.;