IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation in motor accident cases, considering factors such as the deceased's income, personal expenses, and future prospects, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT :

(Nisha M. Thakore, J.)

1. THE INTRODUCTION :

The appellants, who are the original claimants, have approached this Court seeking enhancement of the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Court- Kachchh at Bhuj (hereinafter, “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C.P. No.114 of 2010 against the present respondents-original opponents to the tune of Rs. 38 Lakhs. Vide order dated 25.09.2018, the Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim petition thereby awarding amount of Rs.6,37,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of such claim petition till its realization.

2. THE FACTS:

The facts, in nutshell as contended by the original claimants in the claim petition, are as under:

2.1 It is the case of the original claimant that on the fateful day of the accident i.e. on 09.02.2010, the deceased Sidik Salemamad Hingora was driving the Chhakdo Rickshaw bearing registration No.GJ- 12-Z-5586 with passengers from Kothara to Bhuj with moderate speed. It is the case of the original claimants that, when he reached the place of the accident, the respondent No.1 who was driving her Santro car bearing registration No.CH-03-Y-5048, suddenly took turn without any indication of signal and acted in rash and negligent manner and lost the control, resulting into the accident with Chhakdo Rickshaw. Because of such accident, the deceased had sustained serious injuries and was shifted to the hospital, who unfortunately succumbed to the injuries and died at the young age of 39 years.

2.2 The original claimants, who are the parents, wife, brothers and sisters and children of the deceased, had preferred the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal which was registered as M.A.C.P. No.114 of 2010. The driver of the Santro Car was joined as opponent No.1, whereas the owner of the offending vehicle was joined as opponent No.2. The said vehicle was insured with opponent No.3-Insurance Company.

2.3 Though summons issued by the Tribunal, were duly served upon the opponents, the opponent Nos. 1 and 2 have chosen not to file any written statement, whereas opponent No.3-Insurance Company had appeared through the learned advocate and had objected by filing written statement at Exh.21. Considering the pleadings, the Tribunal had framed issues at Exh.28. Before the Tribunal, the original claimants had produced various documentary evidences, which include the copy of FIR (Exh.32), the copy of panchnama of place of accident (Exh.33), the copy of inquest panchnama (Exh.34), the copy of post mortem report (Exh.35), the copy of insurance policy of offending vehicle marked 30/5, the copy of R.C. book of offending vehicle (Exh.36), the copy of 7/12 abstract (Exh.37), the copy of form No.8A (Exh.38) and true copy of school leaving certificate of deceased (Exh.39).The original claimant- Sharifabai Sidik Hingora (widow of the deceased) had offered her evidence, which was recorded at Exh.31. Apart from the said witness, the original claimant had also examined Ilias Salemamad Hingora at Exh.45. No other evidences were lead by the original claimant as well as the Insurance Company.

3. ANALYSIS OF ORDER OF TRIBUNAL:

3.1 The Tribunal upon appreciation of the aforesaid evidences, more particularly, FIR and panchnama of the place of accident (Exh.33), was convinced that the accident had taken place due to sole negligence of the driver of the Santro Car, which had caused serious injuries to the deceased and had proceeded to answer issue No.1 holding the opponents negligent in causing the accident.

3.2 On the aspect of computation of compensation, considering the fact that the deceased was plying Rickshaw and claimed to be earning Rs.6,000/- per month in placed called Abadasa of District- Kutchh, the Tribunal had determined the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month. The Tribunal had, thereafter, considered the future prospective income of the deceased in light of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble