RAJENDRA SAXENA,J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the award dated 30.1.1990 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (in short, 'the Tribunal'), awarding compensation for an amount of Rs. 4,86,000/ - with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing claim petition in favour of appellants and against the respondents. The appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation amount.
(2.) FOR the disposal of this appeal, it would suffice to mention that on 18.1.1987 at about 5.30 a.m. the deceased Pramod Kumar was going from Delhi to Jaipur on National Highway No. 8 by car No. DHC 3419, that when he reached about 10 km. from hahpura, truck No. GRN 3754, which was being driven by Mohd. Ishaq, respondent No. 1 and owned by Usman Gani Ibrahim, respondent No. 2, collided with the said car coming on the wrong side of the road and that Pramod Kumar sustained fatal injuries and died. It is alleged that the said truck was being driven rashly and negligently, the legal representatives of the deceased, namely, Kanchan Devi Tyagi, widow aged 27 years, Janu Priya, minor daughter aged 4 years, minor son master Priyank aged 3 years, and parents S.S. Tyagi and Savitri Devi aged 58 and 56 years respectively, submitted a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/ -. The driver and owner of the offending truck did not file any reply. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 3, in its reply admitted the factum of the accident but, inter alia, averred that the said accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent act of the car driver and that the owner and insurance company of the said car were also necessary parties. The Tribunal after framing necessary issues and recording the evidence held that the said accident was caused due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending truck, wherein Pramod Kumar sustained fatal injuries resulting into his death, that at the time of the accident, the driver was in the employment of the truck owner, that the deceased was not at fault and that the owner and insurer of the car were not necessary parties. The Tribunal further held that at the time of the accident, the age of the deceased was about 32, that his annual income was Rs. 27,550 and that after deduction of the conventional one -third income, which he used to spend for his self -maintenance and insurance, the loss of income to his family was Rs. 18,367/ - (Sic). The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 26 years and allowed compensation of Rs. 4,77,000/ - as loss of income to the dependants. The Tribunal also allowed an amount of Rs. 5,000/ - under the head loss of consortium to the widow and Rs. 2,000/ - each to the minor son and daughter of the deceased under the head loss of love, affection and the society. However, the Tribunal neither allowed any compensation to the parents of the deceased under this head nor granted any compensation for funeral expenses. The Tribunal by its impugned award thus granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,86,000/ - with interest.
(3.) I have heard Mr. Sunil Tyagi, the learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Virendra Agrawal, learned Counsel for the respondent -insurer at length and carefully perused the record of the Tribunal in extenso.;