- (1.) THIS appeal u/s. 173 of theMotor Vehicles Act, 1988is directed against the judgment and award dated 26.05.2006 passed by Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Hazaribagh in Claim Case No. 88 of 2003 by which a sum of Rs. 1,98,000.00 has been awarded as compensation. In the instant appeal the claimants -appellants claimed enhancement of compensation.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as under: The deceased was driver of Tata 407 truck bearing registration No. JH -02A -9736. The claimants ' case was that on the unfateful date accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of one Half Dala Saktiman Vehicle and also due to rash and negligent driving of Tata 407 Truck. The deceased was aged about 32 years and according to the claimants his monthly income was Rs. 3500/ - per month. The vehicle Tata 407 which was being driven by the deceased was insured with the respondent - Insurance Company. After the death of the deceased the claimants instead of claiming compensation by approaching the forum under the Workmen 'sCompensation Act filed application before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal after recording the finding that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 3500/ - assessed the compensation amount by taking help of the Schedule appended to the Workmen 'sCompensation Act. Mr. Arvind Kumar Lall, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants assailed the impugned judgment particularly the issue by which the compensation amount was determined as being illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned Counsel submitted that Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'the Act ') gives option to the claimants to choose either of the two forums i.e. the Workmen 'sCompensation Act or the Motor Vehicles Act. According to the learned Counsel, if claim application filed was under the Motor Vehicles Act then the Tribunal is not supposed to assess compensation by applying the provisions of Workmen 'sCompensation Act. According to the learned Counsel, if the multiplier theory is applied the appellants shall be entitled to get compensation more than rupees four lakhs.
(3.) WE are unable to accept the submission of learned Counsel appearing for the appellants for the reasons discussed hereinafter;