ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal was filed by the United india Insurance Company Limited, warangal, aggrieved by the judgment and decree Dt. 30-4-1993 in O. P. No. 43 of 1991 on the file of the Chairman (Addl. Dist. Judge) Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, warangal, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation, for the untimely death of the deceased, mattedu Issac, the son of the claimants 1 and 2 and brother of the third claimant, in a motor vehicle accident that had occurred on 18-12-1990 when the deceased was travelling on the tractor bearing No. AP36- t. 197 as coolie, belonging to the fourth respondent herein. On the fateful day the deceased alongwith two others who were also working as coolies, while transporting wooden logs, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said tractor and trailer, it turned turtle resulting in the death of the said Issac, aged about 20 years at the time of accident and earning a sum of rs. 1,000/- per month and was a bachelor. The police registered a case in Crime No. 75 of 1990. It is an admitted case that the deceased Jayapal and Ramesh were travelling on the tractor and trailer alongwith the load of the wooden logs belonging to the fourth respondent herein.

( 2 ) BASED on the oral and documentary evidence of the father of the deceased and p. W. 2, who is a direct witness to the accident, and in the absence of oral or documentary evidence on behalf of the respondents) the Tribunal below has held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor and therefore, the respondents are liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

( 3 ) COMING to the question of the quantum of compensation to which the claimants are entitled to, the Tribunal has determined the age of the deceased as 20 years. Though the petitioners have asserted that the deceased was earning Rs. 1,000/- per month, the Tribunal, on a guess work, assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 300/- on the ground that the deceased was not having work in all the seasons of the year. After deducting a sum of Rs. 100/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal assessed the contribution of the deceased to the family at rs. 200/ -. But ultimately, the Tribunal assessed the contribution to the petitioners at Rs. 150/- per month deducting a sum of rs. 50/- as a further cut on account of the marriage of the petitioner in due course. The Tribunal applied a multiplier of 19 based upon the principle laid down in the judgment Bhagwandan vs. Mohd. Arif, as the deceased hailed from a rural background. Therefore, the Tribunal calculated the future loss of earning at Rs. 34,200/ -. It further awarded a compensation of rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering, loss of expectation of life and loss of amenities. Thus it granted a total compensation of Rs. 49,200/- which was rounded off to Rs. 50,000/ -.

( 4 ) THE Insurance Company has taken a stand that it is not liable to pay the compensation determined by the Tribunal below on the ground that the deceased was travelling sitting on the fight side of the mudguard of the tractor; whereas under the policy only one person is allowed to travel on the tractor. Therefore, since the deceased has travelled sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, contrary to the terms and conditions of the policy, the insurer is not liable to pay the compensation.

( 5 ) THOUGH the Tribunal below has held that the tractor and trailer comes within the meaning of Sec. 2 (44) of the Motor Vehicles act, i. e. , the goods vehicle, it jointly and severally fixed the liability on the insured and the insurer. The contention of the appellant is that since the deceased travelled sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, which he is not supposed to travel, the insured has violated the terms and conditions of the policy, as the insurer is not liabl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document