- (1.) THE appellant/non -claimant, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., has filed the present misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 22.01.2015 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Barmer, in Claim Case No.249/2012 - Smt. Meena Devi & Ors. Vs. Prem Ram & Ors.), whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.37,62,550/ - on account of unfortunate death of Sh. Satish Kumar, who was working as Constable in the police department, and died in harness.
(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated, the facts of the case are that the claimants/respondents No.1 to 6 laid a claim under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, on account of unfortunate death of Sh. Satish Kumar, who is husband of respondent No.1, Smt. Meena Devi, and father of respondents No.2 to 5, Ms. Pooja devi, Prince Chandra, Pradeep Kumar, Priyaka Kumari, and son of respondent No.6, Neelam Rani W/o Dhuni Chand. It was averred in the claim petition that on 19.06.2012 at about 02.00 PM, deceased Sh. Satish Kumar, police constable was going from Barmer to Jaisalmer on road, and when he got down from the bus, a Dumper Truck (RJ -04 -G -3193) plied by its driver, namely, Prem Ram (respondent No.7) rashly and negligently hit Satish Kumar who died on the spot. At the time of accident the vehicle Dumper Truck was insured with the appellant - United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
(3.) AFTER evaluating the evidence about the income of the deceased Sh. Satish Kumar and death caused in the said accident, the learned Tribunal has proceeded to award a compensation to the tune of Rs.37,62,550/ - in favour of claimants/respondents in the manner as indicated in the impugned award dated 22.01.2015. Mr. Anil Kaushik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant - Insurance Company, relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhakra Beas Management Board Vs. Kanta Aggarwal and Ors., 2008 ACJ 2372 submitted that since the son of the deceased Satish Kumar was granted appointment on compassionate grounds under the 1996 Rules in the police department and so also exgratia payment was also made to the family of the deceased on account of his death of employee, by the Department and those financial benefits taken by the claimants/legal representatives of deceased, have not been taken into account by the learned Tribunal while awarding compensation under the M.V. Act, 1988. He also submitted that while awarding the compensation the future prospects of increase in the income of deceased, Satish Kumar, the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding interest thereon, which could not have been done and, therefore, appeal of Insurance Company deserves to be allowed and award impugned deserves to be set aside. Learned counsel for the appellant, however, has not questioned the liability of the appellant to pay the compensation as the vehicle in question was comprehensively insured with it.;