JUDGMENT :

(MAUNA M. BHATT, J.)

1. These cross appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act’ for short) are filed challenging the judgment and award dated 7.8.2012, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Court No.9, Ahmedabad in M.A.C.P. No.678 of 2005.

2. In First Appeal No. 3831 of 2012 appellants are the original claimants and filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation whereas in First Appeal No.806 of 2013 appellant is the Insurance Company (original Opponent No.3), and filed this appeal questioning its liability to pay the compensation.

3. As both these cross appeals are arising out of judgment and award dated 7.8.2012, in M.A.C.P. No.678 of 2005, for the same accident, they are heard and decided together.

4. Following facts emerge from the record of these appeals:

4.1. That Shri Dineshchandra Hasmukhlal Thakkar (herein after referred to as deceased) was going to his office at Jindal Taxofab on 6.8.2005 by driving a scooter bearing registration No. GJ-1-JJ-7510. When he reached near Nirma underpass closer to Hanumanji Temple, the driver of Tractor bearing registration No. GJ-2-L-7114 came in a rash and negligent manner from the wrong side and dashed with the scooter. On account of this, the deceased fell down, sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The FIR was lodged and panchnama was prepared. For the said accident, the original claimants filed Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation of Rs. 30 lakhs.

4.2. It was the case of the claimants in the Claim Petition that the accident occurred because of sole negligence on part of the driver of the tractor. It was further their case that the deceased was earning Rs.8,000/-p.m. as he was a Manager in Jindal Taxofab Limited and in addition to the salary income, the deceased was doing business and from that also, he was earning substantial income. In support of his income from business, the claimants had placed on record income tax returns for the following Assessment years:-

(i) AY 2003-2004 (Rs.42,111 minus Income tax and other deductions) = Rs.38980/-.

(ii) AY 2004-2005 (Rs.71,510 minus Income tax and other deductions) = Rs.64,496/-.

(iii) AY 2005-2006 (Rs.1,42,558 minus Income tax and other deductions) = Rs.1,10,447/-. (The return for AY 2005- 2006 was filed after death of the deceased by the wife).

4.3. It was their case that on account of untimely death of the claimant, they are entitled for the total compensation under different heads as claimed.

5. In First Appeal No.806 of 2013 (arises out of M.A.C.P.678 of 2005), it was case of the Insurance Company that at the time of accident, the driver of tractor was not holding valid and effective license. The driver was holding license to drive light motor vehicle whereas he was driving a tractor with tanker, which is a transport vehicle. Transport vehicle does not come within the definition of ‘light motor vehicle’ for which the license was issued and therefore, driver was not holding valid and effective license at the time of accident. Therefore insurance company was not liable for the payment of compensation.

6. The Tribunal framed the following issues for consideration:

1. Whether the applicant (s) proves (s) that deceased died due to rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the Tractor involved?

2. What amount of compensation and from whom claimant is entitled to?

3. What order and award?

7. The Tribunal after hearing the parties and considering the evidence on record decided the issue No.1 i.e. of negligence, by holding the driver of the tractor as sole negligent for the accident. For Issues Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. of compensation, Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.6,49,000/- under different heads as under: