Accurate computation of compensation based on the deceased's income, future prospects, and other conventional heads is essential in motor vehicle accident claims.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent National Insurance Company Limited.

2. The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 10.4.2014 passed in Claim Case no. 67 of 2009 by the learned Adhoc Additional District Judge II – cum – Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Vaishali at Hajipur whereby the respondent Insurance Company was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 2,43,680/- to the claimants within three months.

3. The facts in brief are that while the deceased Anirudh Sah was going to the garage of one Bharat Sharma, as a result of rash and negligent driving by the driver of an unnumbered Swaraj tractor, he met with an accident in which he received serious injuries. The driver of the tractor was caught by the local persons and the tractor was seized. A case being Hajipur Town P.S. Case no. 89 of 2006 was registered. The injured Anirudh Sah died in course of treatment. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted.

4. A claim application was filed on behalf of the claimants (appellants herein) stating therein that the deceased was aged 46 years, was working as an employee in Urwashi Hotel, Hajipur and was earning Rs. 5,000/-per month. He was the only earning member of the family on whom the whole family was dependent for their livelihood. The opposite party nos. 1 and 2 who were respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein did not appear before the learned Tribunal and the claim case proceeded ex parte as against them. The respondent no. 3 Insurance Company appeared and filed their written statement stating that the driver had no valid driving licence at the time of accident and the claimants had not filed their heirship certificate. However, they admitted that the tractor was insured for agricultural purpose but was being used for commercial purpose.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, the learned Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim case directing the respondent Insurance Company to pay Rs. 2,43,680/-within a period of three months to the claimants.

6. At this stage it is stated by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the total amount has already been paid to the claimants in the year 2014 itself.

7. It is contended by learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the learned Tribunal committed an error in not accepting that the deceased was earning salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month. It is further submitted that the future prospects of 25% has also not been added in the computation and further the amounts paid under the head of general and non pecuniary damages ie other conventional head is also on the lower side. Inspite of the categorical statement of the witnesses Meghnath Sah and Kaushalya Devi to the effect that the deceased was working as a Munshi in the Urwashi Hotel and was earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/-per month, it is submitted that the witnesses not having been cross examined on the specific point on behalf of the Insurance Company, the same has to be taken at its face value. Learned counsel in support of his contention further relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Ramachandrappa Vs The Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited [AIR 2011 SC 2951 and more particularly paragraph no. 14 thereof.

8. The application is opposed by learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company who submits that there is no error in the order of the learned Tribunal in view of the fact that the accident had taken place in the year 2006 and the amount payable at the time of accident have already been paid to the claimants soon after the judgment of the Tribunal in the year 2014 itself. It is submitted that there is no merit in the appeal and the same be dismissed. It is lastly submitted that in case the contention of the respondent d