IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 502 of 2006 Uttaranchal Transport Corporation …Appellant Versus Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & others .. Respondents Sri V.K. Bisht, senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Sangeeta Miyan, Advocate, for appellant. Sri S.K. Mandal, Advocate, for respondents no. 1 and 2 Dated: May 9, 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 30.06.2006, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in M.A.C.P. No. 60 of 2004, Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & others vs. Uttaranchal State Road Transport Corporation. The claimants filed a claim petition before Claims Tribunal for grant of compensation in lieu of death of deceased-Veer Pal in a motor accident. According to the claimants, on 17.12.2003 at about 6.30 p.m. deceased-Veer Pal was going to village Maholiya from village Bara. When he reached near Manjeet Farm at Kichha Road, driver of Roadways Bus No. U.P.04-0147 coming from Kichha side rashly and negligently dashed deceased-Veer Pal due to which deceased died instantaneously. The claimants alleged that deceased was 26 years of age and used to earn Rs.4000/- per month from the shop of cycle. 2 The opposite party no. 1-Uttaranchal Transport Corporation filed its written statement refuting almost all the contents of claim petition. It has pleaded that on 17.12.2003 Bus No. U.P.-04- 0147 was employed at Haridwar-Tanakpur road and bus was being plied by its driver slowly and carefully and according to bus driver and conductor no accident occurred in between Haridwar and Tanakpur road. The opposite parties no. 2 and 3 filed their separate written statements and pleaded that they suffered mental and economic loss on account of death of their son-Veerpal in motor accident, therefore, they may be awarded 1/3rd of amount of compensation. 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 material available on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties partly allowed the claim petition in favour of claimants for a sum of Rs.4,15,000/- payable by opposite party no. 1- Uttaranchal Transport Corporation, within a period of two months, along with an interest @ 5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and award, the appellant-Uttaranchal Transport Corporation has preferred the appeal before this Court. 3 Heard Sri V.K. Bisht, senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Sangeeta Miyan, Advocate, for appellant, Sri S.K. Mandal, Advocate, for respondents no. 1 & 2 and perused the record. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award. Perusal of evidence on record reveals that the learned Tribunal after having considered the entire evidence available before it came to the conclusion that accident in question took placed on 17.12.2003 at about 6.30 p.m. near Manjeet Farm, within the limits of P.S. Sitarganj due to rash and negligence of driver of Bus No. U.P.04-0147, due to which Veerpal sustained injuries and succumbed to those injuries. I do not find any illegality in the finding recorded by the Tribunal in this regard. As far as amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants is concerned, the claimants stated in his claim petition that at the time of accident the deceased-Veerpal was earning Rs.4000/- per month from the shop of cycle but no plausible evidence has been adduced by the claimants in order to prove the income of deceased. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal keeping in view the age of deceased at the time of accident has assessed the monthly income of deceased at Rs.3000/- per month, which appears to be justified. After deducting 1/3rd out of it towards personal expenses of the deceased, the financial dependency of claimants comes to Rs. 2,000/- per month i.e. Rs.24,000/- per annum. The claimants stated in the claim petition that age of deceased was 26 years at the time of his death and this age has also been mentioned in post mortem report. Keeping in view 4 the age of the deceased as well as financial dependency of the claimants, multiplier of ‘17’ as has been adopted by the Tribunal appears to be just and adequate and after adopting the multiplier of ‘17’, the financial dependency of the claimants comes to Rs. 24,000 x 17= Rs.4,08,000/-. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.2000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5000/- towards mental agony. In this way, the Tribunal awarded total amount of compensation of Rs. 4,15,000/-, which appears to be just and reasonable and the same does not require any interference. The interest as has been indicated in the award also does not require any interference. In view of aforesaid discussion, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is confirmed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP