The court applied the principles established in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors, (2017) 16 SCC 680, regarding compensation entitlement in motor accident cases.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.

1. This instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 19.05.2003 passed by the Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 4th Court, Burdwan in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 44 of 2002 (158 of 2002) thereby the learned Tribunal allowed the claim application in part on contest against the O.P./United India Insurance Co. and ex parte against the rest but without any cost. It is further ordered that the O.P./United India Ins. Co. shall pay compensation amount of Rs. 1,55,600/-to the appellant/claimant by way of issuing an A/C payee cheque in her name within sixty days failing which the appellant/claimant shall be at liberty to realise the same together with an interest @ 15% p.a. in due course of law.

2. Brief facts are relevant for the purpose of disposal of the instant case as follows:

On 30.01.1997 at about 8.15 am when the deceased was travelling in the mini bus bearing No. WB-37/1157 from Benachiti to Durgapur and when the said bus stopped at the City Centre for enabling the passengers to alight from the bus, at that time another express bus bearing no. WMH/2092 which was proceeding from the opposite side at a very high speed, suddenly dashed against the mini bus as a result the victim died at the spot. Rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle bearing no. WMH/2092 was the sole cause for the accident. The victim died at the age of 28, he was unmarried and he used to earn Rs. 2500/-per month by working in the M/s Geeta Construction. So, the appellant/claimant being the mother of the victim prayed for an award of Rs. 6,00,000/-as compensation.

3. The opposite party/United India Ins. Co. contested the application for compensation by filing a written objection denying all the material allegations against it stating inter alia that the appellant/claimant has no cause of action to file this case. The claim of the appellant/claimant is barred by the law of limitation, waiver and acquiescence. Appellant’s case is not maintainable in law. Death of the deceased was not caused by motor traffic accident. The offending vehicle bearing no. WMH/2092 was not at all involved in any motor traffic accident on the relevant date nor the same was insured with the OP/United India Insurance Co. during the period when the accident took place. The accident in question did not take place due to the fault on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. So, the O.P./United India Ins. Co. is not liable to indemnify any amount of compensation to the appellant and is liable to be dismissed. However, the Learned Tribunal after scanning and appreciation of evidence, both oral and documentary brought on record by the parties, finally came to the conclusion that the accident took place on the date, time and manner as claimed by the claimant. Decease also died on the spot due to such an accident. Not only that the Learned Tribunal further held that the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle was solely responsible for the said accident. Xerox copies of the FIR, Charge Sheet, P.M. report, registration certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, West Bengal and Insurance policy marked as exhibits 1 to 6 respectively and further oral evidence proved the case of the claimant in definite and positive without any contradiction or rebuttal.

4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant/claimant submitted that there is no dispute regarding date, time and manner of accident and death of the victim on the spot. There is no dispute regarding assessment of the income of Rs.2,400/-per month of the victim by the Learned Tribunal. However, the Learned Tribunal did not consider the compensation amount towards the future prospect, actual general damages and actual Multiplier of the victim otherwise compensation amount would have been enhanced. It is also submitted on his usual fairn