IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 547 of 2005 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. … Appellant Versus Smt. Bhagwati Devi & others … Respondents Sri R.B. Aggarwal, Advocate, for appellant-insurance company Sri Raveendra Singh Bisht, Advocate, for respondent no. 6 Dated: April 10, 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 21.9.2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/IInd Additional District Judge, Nainital, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 33 of 2004, Smt. Bhagwati Devi & others versus Kirtan Singh Koranga & another. Briefly stated the facts, according to the claimants, are that on 8.1.2004 deceased-Bishan Dutt came to Garam Pani from his village and when he was going on foot at Bhowali-Garam Pani Road at 6.00 p.m., a Truck No. U.P.-28-0193, which was being driven by its driver rashly and negligently, crushed the deceased-Bishan Dutt, due to which he died during treatment. The claimants have pleaded that at the time of accident deceased was earning Rs. 5000/- per month by selling the cloths in the market and was aged about 43 years. The claimants thus claimed for a sum of Rs. 15,50,000/- as compensation. The opposite party no. 1-Kirtan Singh, owner of vehicle filed the written statement and denied the facts of the alleged accident. He has further pleaded in his written statement that on 8.1.2004 at 8.30 p.m. the alleged truck was being plied at Haldwani- Almora Marg and was going to Kapkot and near Chapra some unknown persons held up the road and broken the mirror of the truck. The report of the said accident was lodged on 9.1.2004 at about 3.00 p.m. He has further denied the death of deceased-Bihan Dutt due to accident caused by Truck No. U.P.-28-0193 and also denied any liability to pay the compensation to the claimants. The opposite party no. 2-New India Assurance Co. Ltd./appellant before this Court, filed written statement refuting the contents of claim petition. It has pleaded that no information with regard to accident was given to it under the provisions of Sections 158(6) and 134(A) of Motor Vehicles Act. It has also pleaded that before proving the ownership and insurance of vehicle by insurance company validity of driving licence and other papers relating to vehicle is mandatory. It has further pleaded that amount claimed is excessive and insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation. The Tribunal after having considered the material available before it and hearing the learned counsel for the parties decreed the claim petition for a sum of Rs.3,92,000/- as compensation, in favour of claimants, against respondent no. 2-New India Assurance Co. Ltd., along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the final payment of compensation. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and award, the appellant-insurance company has preferred the appeal before this Court. Sri R.B. Aggarwal, learned counsel for appellant-insurance company, Sri Raveendra Singh Bisht, learned counsel for respondent no. 6 and perused the record. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in calculating the amount of compensation as well as in selecting the multiplier. He has also contended that learned Tribunal wrongly imposed the liability upon the appellant-insurance company to pay the compensation. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award thoroughly. The Claims Tribunal on the basis of the evidence adduced before it has held that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of Truck No. U.P.28/0193 at Bhowali-Garam Pani Road on 8.1.2004 at 6.00 p.m. The evidence reveals that the offending vehicle was insured with opposite party no. 2-New India Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and driver of said vehicle was holding valid driving licence, therefore, the insurance company is liable to pay compensation. I do not find any reason to disturb the finding recorded by the Tribunal with regard to rash and negligence of offending vehicle and liability of insurance company to pay the compensation. As far as amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants is concerned, it reveals from the impugned judgment and award that the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier of ‘16’ in this case in calculating the amount of compensation. I do not find any reason to set aside the finding recorded by the Tribunal with regard to annual income of the deceased which has been assessed at Rs.36,000/- per annum and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, the financial dependency of the claimants has been assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. Versus S. Rajpriya & others, reported in 2005 (4) SC 87, has adopted a multiplier of ‘12’ where the age of the deceased was 38 years. In the instant case, the age of the deceased was 40 years as has been observed by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment and award and considering the age of the deceased as 40 years the multiplier in the instant case could not have been exceeded more than ‘11’ in view of the pronouncement of the Hon’ble Apex Court (supra). On the basis of the aforesaid calculation, the total amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants, comes to Rs.24,000 x 11=Rs.2,64,000/-. The Tribunal has further awarded Rs.3000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5000/- for cremation expenses to the claimants, which appears to be justified and does not require any interference. The total amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants thus comes to Rs.2,64,000 + Rs.3000 + Rs.5000=Rs.2,72,000/-, instead of Rs.3,92,000/- as has been awarded by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment and award. The rate of interest indicated in the impugned judgment and award is not liable to be interfered. The apportionment of amount of compensation among the claimants should be as follows: The claimants no. 3, 4 and 5, namely, Mohan Chandra, Km. Jyoti and Km. Shanti are the minors, therefore, they shall get Rs.50,000/- each out of amount of compensation, which shall be deposited in their names in Fixed Deposit with some Nationalized Bank for the period till they attain the age of majority. Claimant no. 2-Suresh Chandra, son of deceased-Bishan Dutt was aged about 18 years at the time of passing the award in the year 2005, therefore, he shall get Rs.40,000/-, out of which Rs.20,000/- shall be paid to him in cash and remaining Rs. 20,000/- shall be deposited in his name in Fixed Deposit with some Nationalized Bank for a period of five years. Claimant no. 1-Smt. Bhagwati Devi, who is the widow of deceased- Bishan Dutt, shall get rest of the awarded amount in cash. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent that amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants, is Rs.2,72,000/- (Two Lacs Seventy Two Thousand only), instead of Rs.3,92,000/- as has been awarded by the Tribunal. In case, if the appellant-insurance company has deposited the entire amount as has been awarded by the Tribunal, the balance amount shall be refunded to the appellant-The New India Assurance Company Limited. The statutory amount deposited by the appellant-insurance company before this Court at the time of filing the appeal, shall be remitted to the Tribunal concerned. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP