- (1.) APPELLANTS have laid this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'Act') to challenge the impugned judgment and award dated 25th of October, 2013 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (First) Jodhpur (for short, 'learned Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal, while adjudicating claim of the respondents -claimants under Section 166 of the Act, awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,10,000/ -.
(2.) THE bare necessary facts are that Smt. Shayara died due to road accident, which occurred on 31 st August, 2007, when she was undertaking journey from Raipur, District Pali to Ramdevra as pedestrian to pay homage to Lord Ramdev. The accident occurred nearby Manaklav Railway Crossing and cause of accident was attributed to Government Vehicle, Ambulance No.RJ -19 -E -1185. It is specifically averred, in the claim petition, that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by its driver (fourth respondent) Aidan. Due to crushing injuries, which occurred on account of accident, Smt. Shayara died on the spot. The accident was reported to Police Station Mandore, Jodhpur and a charge -sheet under Sections 279 and 304A Indian Penal Code was filed against the driver of offending vehicle. In order to quantify the amount of compensation, in the claim petition, age of Shayara was shown as 39 years and her monthly salary was indicated as Rs.4,500/ -, which she was earning by vending vegetables. In all, total claim amount to the tune of Rs.16,61,000/ - was quantified. The claim petition was contested by the appellants as well as driver of the vehicle and the factum of accident itself was denied. On the basis of pleadings of rival parties issues were framed by the learned Tribunal. For substantiating the claim son of deceased - Firoz Khan, and one more witness Hukmaram appeared in the witness box. That apart, 12 documents were submitted, which were exhibited. On behalf of the appellants, Dr. Hemraj Goyal and Aidan appeared in the witness box.
(3.) THE learned Tribunal, while adjudicating Issue No.1, discussed the evidence threadbare and found that cause of accident was rash and negligent driving of the Government vehicle and accordingly Issue No.1 was decided in favour of respondent -claimants and against the appellants. As the Issue No.2 was settled on the basis of averments contained in reply of the appellants, therefore, its burden was on the appellants consequently in want of discharge of its burden by the appellants, the said issue was also decided against the appellants. The crucial issue, relating to quantum of compensation, is decided partly in favour of respondent -claimants. The learned Tribunal, while considering documentary evidence available on record, found that deceased was 40 years old at the time accident. By considering her monthly income as Rs.3,000/ - and after deducting one -third amount against her living and personal expenses, the learned Tribunal applied multiplier of 15 and quantified total amount of compensation for loss of dependency to the tune of Rs.3,60,000/ -. That apart, Rs.25,000/ - were awarded for loss of love and affection and Rs.25,000/ - for funeral expenses. In all, total compensation was awarded as Rs.4,10,000/ -.;