Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the claimants/appellants and Sri Bimlesh Kumar Jha, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of Respondent no.2/ insurer of the offending vehicle.

2. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act,1988 has been preferred against the Judgment dated 09.02.2010 and Award dated 17.02.2010 passed in Claim Case no.212 of 2006 by learned District Judge-cum- Claim Tribunal, Muzaffarpur (hereinafter referred to as the “Claim Tribunal”). By the said Judgment and Award, the learned Claim Tribunal, while allowing the claim petition, has directed the Respondent no.2/insurer of the offending vehicle to make payment of Rs. 1,62,500/- after deducting Rs.50,000/-, which was already paid as interim compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, to the claimants. The Claim Tribunal further directed to pay interest @ 5 % per annum on the compensation amount from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its payment. The Claim Tribunal directed to send the compensation amount to the Branch Manager of the Bank to fix the entire amount in the Fixed Deposit monthly income scheme in the name of the claimants. The Claim Tribunal has further directed that the claimants shall withdraw the monthly interest occurring thereon. The claimants/appellants in sum and substance have made a prayer for modifying the Judgment and Award by enhancing the compensation amount. It was claimed that the deceased was having monthly income of Rs.2000/- and evidence was led before the Tribunal, even then the Tribunal has gone for notional income and thereafter adopting multiplier has passed order for making payment of compensation amount. The claimants/appellants have further prayed for modifying the order to the extent that only 50% of the compensation amount may be deposited in the monthly income scheme in the Fixed Deposit in stead of entire compensation amount.

3. Short fact of the case is that the claimants filed a claim petition disclosing therein that the claimants are mother and father of the deceased, namely, Ajay Kumar Sah. Before the Tribunal, it was asserted that on 13.06.2006, while their son was returning on a bicycle and he reached near Bansghatta diversion from the wrong side, a Marshall Jeep bearing Registration No.BR-06P/0431 being driven rashly and negligently dashed the son of the claimants/appellants, due to that accident, he fell in a river and died instantaneously. Thereafter, an F.I.R. vide Katra P.S. Case No.29 of 2006 was registered under Sections 279 and 304 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. It was pleaded that the offending Marshall Jeep was insured by Respondent no.2 i.e. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and at the time of accident, it was under valid insurance cover. It was asserted that the deceased was earning Rs.2000/- per month as labourer and, as such, total compensation amount i.e. Rs.2, 09,500/- was claimed by the claimants.

4. Before the Claim Tribunal, in support of the claim, four witnesses were examined. Out of four witnesses, C.Ws. 1 and 3 are appellant nos.1 and 2 respectively. C.Ws 2 and 4 had claimed to be the eye witnesses to the occurrence, who corroborated the fact that due to laches or negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, accident had occurred. C.Ws. 1 and 3 have made specific assertion that their son was a labourer and was earning Rs.2000/- per month. However, before the Tribunal, no documentary evidence was brought on record in support of the income of the deceased. The Tribunal on the basis of notional income i.e. prescribed as Rs.15,000/- per annum after deducting 1/3rd of annual income of the deceased has calculated the compensation amount and directed to make payment of the compensation amount as indicated above , which includes Rs.2500/- as funeral expenses.

5. Since after the Judgment and Award, whereby Respondent no.2/insurer of the offending Jeep was directed to make payment of the compensation amount