K.S.LODHA,J. - (1.) THESE two Misc. appeals arise out of the same award and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) ON 27 -8 -1981 in the night, Shri Shiv Pratap Sen, a Demonstrator in Rajasthan Engineering College was going on a scooter No. RRQ 7032 along with his two children, towards his house situated in the Housing Board Colony, Pratap Nagar. At that time, a jonga jeep bearing No. TTQ 527 came from the opposite direction at a very high speed and struck against the scooter of Shiv Pratap as a result of which Shiv Pratap along with his scooter was dragged to some distance and his two sons were thrown away from the scooter. The jonga was being driven by Hansa Ram and it was on account of his rash or negligent act that this accident took place. Shri Shiv Pratap received serious injuries all over his body. He was taken to the hospital but be succumbed to the injuries about after nine days. He was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1,659/ - and was expected to rise as he was an intelligent, enthusiastic and capable young man. He left behind him his wife Smt. Shanti Devi, his widow mother Smt. Gawari Devi, a daughter Lata Rani and two sons Gajendra and Davendra. The sons Davendra and Gajendra are also alleged to have received injuries on account of this incident. Three claims were filed on account of this incident. First claim was filed on behalf of all the five dependents of the deceased Shri Shiv Pratap. Two separate claims were filed on behalf of Gajendra Kumar and Davendra Kumar on account of the injuries received by them. The driver of the jeep Hansa Ram, its owner M/s. Jamnaram Kesusingh and the insurer, the National Insurance Co. were impleaded as parties in all the three claim petitions. It appears that all the three petitions were jointly tried. After framing the necessary issues and taking the evidence of the parties, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the incident took place on account of the rash driving of Shri Hansa Ram driver of the jonga and that Shri Shiv Pratap had received injuries on account of this incident and died on that account. Coming to the question of the quantum of damages, the learned Tribunal was of the view that it was proved that the monthly income of Shri Shiv Pratap was Rs. 1,659/ - and that at the time of this incident, be was working as Demonstrator in the Engineering College and was aged 43. He further found that he had left behind him his mother, aged about 65, his wife aged 37, a daughter Lata Rani aged 13 years, Gajendra 10 years and Davendra 7 years. He further found that out of his income, he spent a sum of Rs. 400/ - on his wife, Rs. 100/ - on his mother, Rs. 150/ - on his daughter and Rs. 125/ - on each of the two sons approximately and thus his total dependency according to him came to about Rs. 900/ - p.m. He was further of the opinion that these dependants would have received this support from the deceased for 23 years, 10 years, 7 years, 10 years and 13 years respectively and he. accordingly, awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,69,500/ - to all these dependants in accordance with the expectancy of the dependence.
(3.) HE further found that Shri Shiv Pratap was making a contribution of Rs. 360/ - p.m. towards his P.P. and would have done so for about 17 years more as his age of superannuation was 60 years and thus according to him, the members of the family would have been entitled to a sum of Rs. 76.840/ -on account of the P.P., he further allowed a sum of Rs. 5,000/ - to Smt. Shanti Devi on account of the loss of her companionship etc. and Rs. 1,000/ - to each of the three daughters and sons, He further awarded a sum of Rs. 500/ - on account of damages to the scooter and Rs. 1,000/ - on account of the medical expenses and treatment of the deceased. Thus he made a total award of Rs. 2,55,840/ -.;