( 1 ) THIS judgment shall dispose of two appeals; one filed by the claimants Ms. Mamta Mohindra, widow of Sh. Sunil Mohindra, Master Sahil (son), miss Shalvi (daughter) and Smt. Kanta Mohindra, mother of the deceased and the other appeal filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (PCR), Police Headquarters, ip. Estate, New Delhi along with driver, Head Constable Jai Prakash, for the vehicle belonged to the Police Department.

( 2 ) BOTH the parties are aggrieved by the award passed by the learned Tribunal by granting compensation amounting to Rs. 8,16,000/-, holding the driver Jai prakash rash and negligent in driving and thereby causing death of Mr. Sunil mohindra; taking monthly income of the deceased @rs. 4,800/-per month plus Rs. 1,200/- towards future prospects, but without appropriately considering the future prospects, deducting one-third but of it and awarding a compensation of Rs. 8,16,000/ -.

( 3 ) THE claimants widow, two minor children and mother of the deceased alleged that the amount awarded was inadequate.

( 4 ) THE Police Department claimed that it was on very high side and the learned Tribunal failed to consider the contributory negligence as argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner here.

( 5 ) HAVING heard the parties Counsel, it appears essential to consider the pleadings as well as the evidence led by the parties.

( 6 ) AS regards the pleadings before the Tribunal, in their written statement the driver as well as the Police Department claimed that their vehicle was not involved in the accident. It was not the case as was sought to be proved later on by leading evidence. About this aspect there is no dispute in between the parties.

( 7 ) NOW, coming to the evidence, P. W. 1, Sh. Shahabuzzaman, in his statement stated that on 6th May, 1994 at about5. 30p. rn. he wasontheouter Ring Road in front of DTC bus stop R. K. Puram. Mr. Sunil Mohindra (deceased) was his colleague and

"had crossed first half of the outer Ring Road from C. P. W. D. Office side and was standing on the central divider with a view to cross other half of the road to reach the bus stop to catch a bus. " When he was standing on the divider edge, a Maruti gypsy bearing No. DL-IA-0431 belonging to PCR came from the left side of Mr. Mohindra. It was at a very fast speed and very close to the central divider. The driver of the gypsy came "to the extreme right side of the road and in that process, right portion of the gypsy struck against Sh. Sunil Mohindra. On account of the forceful impact, the injured was thrown on the central divider and he sustained multiple grievous injuries and was bleeding profusely from the ears. The driver could stop the gypsy after travelling a distance of about 10 metres. . . . . . . . . . ". In cross-examination he stated that

"i had seen the gypsy when it struck against Mr. Mohindra from its right approximately touching the divider but it had not touched the divider. . . ". He also stated that "it is incorrect to suggest that unmindful of the traffic on the other half of the road, while waiving his hand to me, he emerged on the other half of the road and in the process, he met with an accident with that gypsy. It is further incorrect to suggest that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the gypsy for causing the accident. . . ".

( 8 ) FROM the side of the respondents, R. W. 1 driver Jai Prakash was examined and he stated that on 6th May, 1994 at about 5. 20 p. m. they received a call about a dispute. When they were moving in the vehicle on duty at the t point, Paschim marg, Outer Ring Road, New Delhi towards Vasant Vihar Police Station. It appears from his statement that they had moved about 1 to 1 1/2 kilometers. It appears that he claimed that there were bushes on the road divider which were about 6-7 feet high. One person came running from the other side of the road. The moment he saw some movement in the bushes he stopped the vehicle by applying the brakes. The said person who had