1 FA 302/2011 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL 302 OF 2011 Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation .. Petitioner V/s Shivaji Raghunath Kumbhar & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. G.M. Karmalkar i/b G.S. Hegde & Associates for the appellant. Mr. Pratap Patil for the respondents. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 18TH FEBRUARY 2011 P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th November 2009 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangli, awarding compensation of Rs.6,35,487- to the respondents who are the heirs of deceased Jayashree. 3. On 23rd December 2007, Jayashree was travelling as a fare paying passenger in a State Transport Bus owned by the appellant. At about 16.20 hours, the driver lost control of the 2 FA 302/2011 bus on account which the bus collided with a tree by the side of the road. In the accident, Jayashree sustained injuries to her head and was admitted initially at a rural hospital at Kadegaon and thereafter in the Cottage Hospital at Karad. As the injuries sustained by Jayashree was serious, she was shifted to a larger hospital, namely Krishna Hospital at Karad where she underwent a surgery but ultimately succumbed to the injuries on 31st January 2008. After her death, her legal representatives, namely the husband and two minor children, filed an application under under section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “the Act”) for compensation. The defence of the appellant (owner of the vehicle) was that the accident was caused on account of mechanical failure and not on account of a negligence of the driver. In my view, the defence has no relevance inasmuch as the compensation has been claimed under section 163A and not under section 166 of the Act. Section 163A of the Act says that notwithstanding anything contained in the Act or any other law for the time being in force, the owner of the motor vehicle shall be liable to pay in the case of a death or a permanent disability due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, the compensation as indicated in the Second Schedule. The liability to pay compensation under section 163A of the Act is not dependant upon the proof of 3 FA 302/2011 negligence but is a statutory liability arising out of death or permanent disability due to an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle. In the circumstances, in my view, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the defence of the appellant that it was not liable to pay any compensation because the accident was caused on account of a mechanical failure of the motor vehicle. 4. As regards the amount of compensation, the claimants had produced before the Tribunal the birth certificate of the deceased showing her date of birth to be 29th August 1981. As such, at the date of the accident the deceased was 26 years of age. The claimants had also produced before the Tribunal a salary certificate (Exhibit 141) issued by Deputy General Manager, National Association of Disabled Enterprises, where the deceased was working. The salary certificate shows her salary to be Rs.3,000/- per month. As per the structured formula provided in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, the amount of compensation for a third party accident resulting in death of a person aged between 25 and 30 years earning income of Rs.3,000/- p.m., is Rs.6,12,000/-. After deducting 1/3rd amount, which would be spent by the deceased on herself, her contribution to the family would be Rs.4,08,000/-. The Tribunal has correctly computed the compensation at Rs.4,08,000/-. In 4 FA 302/2011 addition, the Tribunal has awarded the actual expenses incurred by the claimants on the medical treatment of the deceased. Admittedly, the accident occurred on 23rd December 2007 and the deceased, after initial treatment in two small hospitals, was taken to a larger hospital, namely Krishna Hospital at Karad and ultimately she succumbed to her injuries on 31st January 2008. The deceased struggled for her life for over a month and was under medical treatment. The bills and receipts for the medical treatment were produced at Exhibits 23 to 137 and the total amount of the expenses as per the bills is Rs.2,20,187/-. As the original bills and receipts were produced which were admitted in evidence, in addition to the compensation for the loss of income the Tribunal awarded the amount of Rs.2,20,487/- spent for medical expenses. The adjudication in this regard cannot be faulted. 5. No other point was urged. 6. There is no merit in the appeal which is hereby dismissed summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)