AJAY RASTOGI, J. - (1.) INSTANT appeal has been filed by Insurance Company questioning quantum of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur ('Tribunal') in claim MACT Case No. 117/98, vide award dated 26.4.2002.
(2.) DECEASED Dharmendra Kumar aged 30 years working as Supervisor in some private firm in Surat had died in an accident which took place on 18.5.1997, while going in marriage party from Chitawa to Katthoti in offending bus No. RJ -26 -P0210, being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. Claimants are parents and younger brother of deceased whose monthly salary was pleaded of Rs. 3,500. The Tribunal, after taking note of material on record awarded total compensation of Rs. 2,81,500 with interest @9% per annum from the date of claim petition till its actual payment vide impugned Award. Only contention advanced by Mr. Virendra Agrawal, Counsel for Insurance Company is that when the deceased was unmarried, the Tribunal erred in applying multiplier looking to the age of deceased whereas it ought to have adopted multiplier keeping in view age of parents who were aged 55 and 50 years, and as per their age multiplier of 11 is appropriate as per 2nd schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, ('the Act') for determination of just compensation. In support of his contention, Counsel placed reliance on the decisions of Apex Court in UP State Road Trans. Corpn. v. Trilok Chand : (1996)4SCC362 and Ghyan Chand Jain v. Permanand I (2003) ACC 149 (SC) : 2003 (1) TAC 490.
(3.) PER contra, Mr. Vinay Mathur, Counsel for claimants supporting the Impugned Award, has urged that under the schedule appended to the Act, multiplier is the basis of age of victim and not on the claimants and the Apex Court has always considered all relevant factors particularly age of unmarried victim so also age of his parents while examining total loss of dependency.;