IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. No. 342/2007 United India Insurance Company Ltd. .. Appellant. Versus Smt. Asharfi and another .. Respondents. With A. O.No. 507/2007 United India Insurance Company Ltd. .. Appellant. Versus Smt. Munni Devi and others .. Respondents. Sri D.S. Patni, learned counsel for the appellant/United India Ins. Co. Sri Sudhir Singh, learned counsel for the claimants/ respondents. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent/owner of the vehicle. Dated: 11-6-2009 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. As both these appeals pertain to the same accident and common controversy is involved in these case, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment. 2- A.O. No.342/2007, has been filed against the judgment and award dated 17-11-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Uttarkashi, in MACT Case No. 40/2005, Smt. Ashrafi Vs. Vijaypal Singh and another, in which the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,42,000/- as compensation along with 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment against the United India Insurance Company in lieu of death of Bipin Singh. 3- A.O. No.507/2007, has been filed against the judgment and award dated 10-9-2007, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Uttarkashi, in MACT Case No. 29/2006, Smt.Munni Devi and another Vs. Vijaypal 2 Singh and another, in which the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation, against the United India Insurance Company, in lieu of death of Chintu. 4- Brief facts of the case are that on 8-10-2005, deceased Bipin Singh and Chintu aged 9 months (with parents) and some other persons were going to village Kafnaul riding in vehicle No. 07-F-3176 D.I. 207 Utility. The said vehicle at about 3.25 P.M. met with accident near Saw machine on Dhari-Kafnaul motor road due to the rash and negligence of its driver. The deceased Chintu and Bipin Singh sustained grievous injuries and died at the spot. 5- The claimants filed claim petitions for compensation. According to the claimants deceased Bipin Singh was aged 17 years and in addition to his studies he used to do the work of vegetation and animal husbandry and his monthly income was Rs. 5,000/-. The another deceased Chintu was 9 months of age at the time of accident. 6- The opposite party/owner of the offending vehicle contested the claim petitions and denied the allegations made in the petitions. He alleged that the driver of the vehicle was not rash and negligent. However the vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Company and its driver was having valid and effective driving license therefore he is not liable to pay the compensation. 7- The United India Insurance Company filed written statement and denied the averments made in the petitions. The insurance company alleged that the vehicle 3 in question was insured as commercial vehicle under open package policy and at the time of accident 16 passengers were travelling in the said vehicle and there was breach of condition of insurance policy. The insurer also took the plea that the accident has occurred due to some mechanical defect in the vehicle. 8- The learned tribunal on the basis of pleadings of parties framed relevant issues in both the claim petitions. Thereafter parties adduced evidence in support of their cases. The learned tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the entire material available on record decreed the claim petitions. 9- Feeling aggrieved the insurance company has preferred this appeals against the impugned judgment and awards. 10- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 11- So far as the factum of accident is concerned, the claimants, who were also travelling in the offending vehicle along with the deceased persons, have deposed that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligence of the driver. Although the opposite parties have taken the plea that the accident was the result of some mechanical defect in the vehicle, but no cogent and reliable evidence has been adduced on this point. It has also not been averred from their side as to whether the technical inspection of the vehicle was done or not. In the above circumstances of the case, the learned tribunal was justified in holding that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligence on the part of the driver. The learned tribunal also recorded a 4 categorical finding that the vehicle was having valid documents and its driver was also possessing valid and effective driving license. It is also held by the tribunal that the vehicle was insured with the United India Insurance Company and there was no breach of conditions of insurance policy. Therefore I do not find any substance in the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the vehicle was being driven against the terms of insurance policy. The tribunal has arrived at this conclusion after scrutinizing the documents filed before it. 12- So far as quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal with regard to deceased Bipin Singh in A.O. No. 342/2007 is concerned, the tribunal has held that although the claimant has stated that the deceased was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month from the work of vegetation and selling milk but no cogent and reliable evidence has been adduced therefore the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum was taken into consideration and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased the total annual dependency was assessed as Rs. 10,000/-. The deceased at the time of accident was 17 years of age and he was unmarried. The tribunal has adopted the multiplier of 13 and calculated the total dependency as Rs. 10,000/- X 13= Rs. 1,30,000/-. The tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- for loss of love and affection and in my opinion the same cannot be said to be unreasonable. In this way the total compensation of Rs. 1,30,000/- + Rs.2,000/-+ Rs. 10,000/-= Rs. 1,42,000/- has been awarded. I do not find any ground to interfere with the finding recorded by the tribunal on the quantum of compensation also. 5 13- In A.O. No. 507/2007 the tribunal has awarded Rs. 50,000/- in respect of death of Chintu who was only 9 months old at the time of accident. The tribunal has recorded a finding that no assessment of compensation on the basis of multiplier should be made in respect of death of a child of 9 months, but certainly the parents of the child have to suffer the mental agony and they have also been deprived of the love and affection of their child, therefore, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded as no fault compensation and the same cannot be said to be on higher side for the death of a child on 9 months. I do not find any infirmity in the above finding also. 14- In view of above discussion both the appeals lack merit and are liable to be dismissed. 15- Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed. 16- Let the statutory amount of compensation deposited with this court, be remitted to the tribunal concerned. 17- A copy of this judgment be placed in the file of A.O. No. 504/2007. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB