IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 794 of 2006 Sri Chhidda Ahmad & another … Appellants Versus The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & another … Respondents Sri Z.U. Siddiquie, Advocate for appellants Sri M. K. Goyal, Advocate for respondent no. 1 Sri Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, for respondent no. 2 Dated: June 12, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 9.10.2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge Nainital in M.A.C.P. No. 53 of 2006, Sri Chhidda Ahmad versus The Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The claimants-Sri Chhidda Ahmad and another filed claim petition before Claims Tribunal for grant of compensation on account of death of deceased-Zulfiqar in a motor vehicle accident. According to the claimants, on 21.2.2006 at about 3.00 p.m. when the deceased-Zulfiqar was going to purchase the milk from the V.I.P. Colony Lalkuan with his colleagues by his cycle, near nursery all of a sudden a Truck bearing Registration No. UP02- 6446 came in a very rash speed from Nainital side whose driver was driving the Truck very negligently and lost control over the vehicle and dashed the deceased from the rear side who was sitting on 2 carrier of cycle, with the result the deceased- Zulfiqar died on the spot and his colleagues sustained grievous injuries. The post mortem of deceased-Zulfiqar was conducted by M.O. Soban Singh Jeena Base Hospital, Haldwani on 22.2.2006. The deceased was 10 years of age at the time of accident. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs.3,85,000/- as compensation against opposite parties. The opposite party no. 1-Oriental Insurance Company Limited filed its written statement alleging therein that insurance company was not given any information with regard to alleged accident. The offending vehicle was being plied in breach of the policy conditions. It has further submitted that it was necessary on the part of owner of vehicle to adduce cogent and reliable evidence in order to prove the concerned documents and facts mentioned in the claim petition. The opposite party no. 2 filed his written statement denying the contents of the claim petition. It has further submitted that driver of vehicle was holding valid driving licence and vehicle was not being plied rashly and negligently. It has also submitted that vehicle of opposite party no. 2 was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. at the time of accident and insurance company is liable to pay compensation, if any. The learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings of parties framed relevant issues in the claim petition. Parties led evidence in support of their cases. The Tribunal after having considered the 3 material available on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties decreed the claim petition for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in favour of claimants, payable by opposite party no. 1-Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. The Tribunal also directed that this amount of compensation is to be paid by opposite party no. 1-Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. within a period of sixty days. The Tribunal further directed that claimants shall be entitled to get an interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of actual payment of compensation. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and award, the claimants-appellants have filed this appeal before this Court for enhancement of compensation. Heard Sri Z.U. Siddiquie, Advocate, for appellants, Sri M. K. Goyal, Advocate, for respondent no. 1, Sri Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, for respondent no. 2 and perused the record. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award thoroughly. The Tribunal, on the evidence led by the parties, held that the deceased- Zulfiqar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 21.2.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending Truck No. UP 02/6446; and the insurer of the offending vehicle i.e. Oriental Insurance Company Limited was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. I do not find any illegality and infirmity in the finding recorded by the Tribunal in this regard. 4 As far as amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants is concerned, the record reveals that the age of deceased was 10 years as per the claim petition, while age of deceased was 13 years as per post mortem report. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs.3,85,000/- as compensation on account of untimely death of his son-Zulfiqar. The claimants produced witness Sri Chhidda Ahmad as PW-1 who stated in his deposition that deceased- Zulfiqar was his only son and rest of the four children are girls. This witness further deposed that on 21.2.2006 near Nursery at Lalkuan-Kichha road driver of Truck No. UP02/6446 dashed the deceased from the rear side in a negligent manner, due to which the deceased-Zulfiqar died on the spot itself. The report of the said accident was lodged at P.S. Lalkuan and post mortem of deceased was got conducted at Soban Singh Jeena Base Hospital, Haldwani. His son was brilliant and was studying in class III at the time of accident. It has further alleged by the claimants that Rs.10,000/- was expended towards funeral expenses of deceased- Zulfiqar. On the other hand, the learned counsel for insurance company has submitted before the Tribunal that the learned Tribunal should have taken into consideration this fact that the dependency of parents on deceased was not on higher side as parents of deceased was having five children and in such situation the multiplier should have been adopted on the age of either father or mother whichever is higher. The learned counsel for insurance company also contended that the multiplier of 17 should have been adopted on notional income of deceased i.e. Rs.15,000/- per annum keeping in view the age of father as 32 years 5 and 1/3rd out of that income should have been deducted. Thus, the total amount of compensation should have been assessed at Rs.15,000 x 1/3 x 17=Rs.1,70,000/-. The learned Tribunal held that in case, if amount of compensation is assessed keeping in view the contention of learned counsel for insurance company, then the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.1,70,000/-. The Tribunal further held that parents of deceased must have suffered mental agony, loss of deprivation of love and affection on account of death of their son. The learned Tribunal keeping in view the contention raised by counsel for insurance company as well as facts and circumstances of the case awarded a total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants, which appears to be justified. I do not find any illegality in the method adopted by the Tribunal in calculating the amount of compensation. As far as interest part is concerned, the interest indicated in the impugned judgment and award as 6% per annum is on lower side and in my view, it should be 7.5% per annum. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent that the claimants are entitled to get an interest @ 7.5% per annum, instead of 6% per annum as has been awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. Learned counsel for insurance company has submitted before this Court that entire amount of 6 compensation has been deposited with the Tribunal concerned along with interest as indicated in the impugned judgment and award. If it is so, the insurance company shall deposit the enhanced rate of interest i.e. 1.5% per annum with the Tribunal concerned. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP 7