Important Point – Adequate amount should be awarded under conventional heads.

M.R. Shah, J. (CAV) - Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Ahmedabad (Rural) [hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”] in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1692/1993 by which the learned Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.8,74,800/- along with 9% interest thereon from the date of application till realisation, towards compensation for the death of deceased Vinubhai, the appellant herein - original claimant - widow of the deceased has preferred the present First Appeal to enhance the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal.

2. In a vehicular accident which took occurred/took place on 08.08.1993 at about 1.00 p.m. on Jetalpur - Bareja National Highway No.8 between Scooter No. GJ-1S-3003 which at the relevant time was being driven by the deceased Vinubhai and one Truck No. GJ-11T-7907 which at the relevant time was being driven by the original opponent No.1, deceased Vinubhai died. Therefore, the widow of the deceased filed the aforesaid claim petition before the learned Tribunal initially claiming a total sum of Rs.9 lac towards compensation for the death of the deceased which subsequently was enhanced to Rs.18 lac.

2.1. It was the case on behalf of the original claimant that the deceased died because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck - original opponent No.1. It was also the case on behalf of the original claimant that the deceased was serving as an Additional Assistant Engineer in Patnagar Scheme, Sub-Division, Gandhinagar and was getting Rs.4657/- per month and was aged about 39 years on the date of the accident. Therefore, the original claimant claimed a total sum of Rs.18 lac towards compensation for the death of deceased under different heads.

2.2. That the claim petition was opposed by the opponents by filing the written statements at Exhs.13 and 37. Original opponent Nos.1 and 3 specifically denied that the original opponent No.1 was in anyway negligent for the accident in which the deceased died. It was specifically denied that the deceased was solely negligent for the occurrence of the accident.

The claimant examined one Janakkumar Jagjivanram Sangadia at Exh.62 who was the co-employee working with the deceased. Relying upon the deposition of the said witness Janakkumar, it was contended on behalf of the original claimant that the income of the deceased for the purpose of future economic loss caused to the claimant shall be considered at Rs.15,900/- per month. Relying upon the deposition of the aforesaid witness it was the case on behalf of the original claimant that there was a revision of pay scale as per the new Pay Commission with effect from 01.04.1992 and the pay scale was revised to Rs.5500/- per month. Therefore, it was requested to award the future economic loss/loss of dependency to the claimant considering the salary/income of the deceased at Rs.15,900/- per month which the co-employee was receiving at the time of deposition.

2.3. That on appreciation of evidence the learned Tribunal has held that the accident was the result of the sole negligence on the part of the truck driver i.e. original opponent No.1. Consequently the learned Tribunal observed and held that therefore the question of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased does not arise.

2.4. That thereafter the learned Tribunal awarded the future economic loss/loss of dependency considering the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4657/- per month [which the deceased was receiving at the time of death] and after adding 50% of the aforesaid towards future rise in income and after deducting ?rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, the learned Tribunal assessed the loss of dependency at Rs.4360/- per month. After applying the multiplier of 16, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.8,38,000/- under the head of loss of dependency. That thereafter awarding further sum of Rs.10,000/- under the head of lo