- (1.) Aggrieved by the award dated 11.03.2010, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chomu, District Jaipur, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.2,70,000/- to the claimants-appellants, the claimants-appellants have still approached this Court.
(2.) Shortly the facts of the case are that on 30.10.2008 around 12 O'clock in the afternoon, Mukesh @ Kailash Chand Sharma was walking to his home from Alisar. When he reached near Navodi Dahani, a tractor, bearing registration No. RJ-14-2R-1454, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit him. Consequently, Mukesh sustained grievous injuries and died. Since the claimants-appellants lost the sole bread earner of the family, they filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. The respondent-Insurance Company filed its reply to the claim petition and denied the averments made therein. On the basis of the pleading of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed five issues. In support of their case the claimants-appellants, examined two witnesses and exhibited thirteen documents. On the other hand, the respondents did not produce any evidence. After going through the oral and documentary evidence and after hearing the parties, vide award dated 11.03.2010, the learned Tribunal awarded the compensation as aforementioned. According to the appellants, since the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is a meager one, they have filed this appeal before this Court. Mr. Lokesh Parihar, the learned counsel for the appellants, has contended that the learned Tribunal was not justified in taking the notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per annum. According to the claimants, the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- per month from selling of milk. Secondly, the learned counsel has relied upon the case of RSRTC Vs. Bakhtawari & Ors. [2005 RAR 30 (Raj.)], to raise the plea that in case of a person running business of sheeps and goats, this Court had taken his income to be Rs.4,000/- per month, therefore, the learned Tribunal was not justified in taking the notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per annum. He has further relied upon the case of Managing Director, Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation Vs. Sarojamma and Anr., 2008 ACJ 1619, in order to argue that in the case of a tutor, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken his salary to be Rs.3,000/- per month.
(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned award.;