Negligence in parking leads to liability; contributory negligence must be proven. Compensation for loss of dependency must factor in future prospects, resulting in a higher award.

Order :

Parth Prateem Sahu, J.

1. Appellants-claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the award dated 19.11.2018 passed by Learned first Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 37/2009, whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 in part and awarded total sum of Rs. 3,09,998/- as compensation in a death case.

2. Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 14.02.2009 Raju Mishra on a motorcycle was returning to his shop from village Risda, at about 10:00 pm. When he reached near new bus stand of village Muktaraja, NH-200, a truck bearing number CG04-G-4291 (henceforth “offending truck”) was parked by its driver-non-applicant No. 2 negligently on the road without any warning indication or turning on indicators of the vehicle, due to which motorcycle of Raju Mishra was dashed with the truck and caused accident. In the said accident, Raju Mishra suffered several grievous injuries over his person. He was taken to Baradwar hospital, from where he was referred to District Hospital, Janjgir-Champa and then to CIMS, Bilaspur. Looking to his non-recovery he was admitted to private nursing home, Vimla Devi Chikitsalaya, Bilaspur. After taking regular treatment for three months, he succumbed to the injuries on 28.05.2019.

3. Appellants-claimants who are parents and sister of deceased Raju Mishra filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation of Rs. 7,80,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident deceased was a young boy aged about 20 years, was an able bodied person. Before accident he was running a cloth garment shop and was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month.

4. Respondent No. 1 & 2 / Non-applicant No. 1 & 2 -owner and driver of the offending truck did not appear before the Claims Tribunal even after service of notice and they were proceeded ex parte.

5. Respondent No. 3/ Non-applicant No. 3/ Insurance Company filed its reply to the claim application, while denying all the adverse pleadings made in the application, it was further pleaded that the alleged accident occurred due to negligence of deceased himself, the motorcycle of deceased dashed with the offending truck. On the date of accident, deceased was not possessed with valid and effective driving license. The offending truck was being driven in breach of conditions of insurance policy as the driver of offending truck was not having valid and effective driving license.

6. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased- Raju Mishra died because of grievous injuries suffered by him in the accident caused by colliding with the offending truck, due to its negligent parking on the road by non-applicant No. 1 in front of Bus Stand Muktaraja. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved, contributory negligence was found to be proved, calculated the amount of compensation and awarded Rs. 3,09,998/- as total compensation with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application and fastened liability upon non-applicant No. 3/Insurance Company.

7. Learned counsel for appellants-claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in holding the deceased 50% contributory negligent in the accident only relying upon the documents of criminal case. Tribunal has