The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, emphasizing the need for rational and fair compensation based on the specific circumstances of the case.

R.B. Misra, J.

1. Heard Mr. Somik Deb, with Mr. A. Pal, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Counsel for the respondent owner. Heard also Mr. P. Gautam, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company.

2. The present appeal has been preferred Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and award dated 24.6.1999 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala (the learned Tribunal for short) in Case No. T.S., (MAC) 261 of 1996 preferred Under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, before the learned Tribunal in reference to the death of Dinesh Das, husband of the appellant No. 1 and father of other claimants in a motor accident which occurred on 21.8.1992 at about 1610 hours at Nailaha Bail on the Assam Agartala road under Ambassa police station.

3. The said accident occurred on 21.8.1992 when the victim Dinesh Das was proceeding along with Assam Agartala Road at Nailahabari with containers of fish fingerlings on his shoulder by a 'BHAR' for selling them to the villagers like a Hawker, he was hit by a Truck bearing No TRL-2875 coming from Ambassa towards Agartala being driven very rashly and negligently with high speed knocking the victim from extreme left side of the road and the said vehicle also outlined from the road. As a result of this accident the victim Dinesh Das was seriously injured and was brought to Kulai Hospital and there from he was referred to G.B. Hospital Agartala where he succumbed to his injuries on 3.8.1992 at about 09.05 hours. In reference to the said accident, the Ambassa P.S. Case No. 7(8)92 Under Section 279/338/427/304 (A) of I.P.C. was registered.

4. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,92,000/- was made with 12% interest per annum from the date of restoration of the case i.e. 30.3.1996 till date of payment with such other directions as indicated in the award.

5. In order to adjudicate the claim of the appellants the learned Tribunal taken into consideration the testimony of prosecution witnesses P.W. 1 Smti. Arati Das, the appellant No. 1 herein, who has made her averments in support of her claim by saying that at the time of accident her husband, aged about 40 years, old was earning Rs. 3000/-as a business man of Fish finger lings and on the date of incidents the value of Fish fingerlings Rs. 4000/-. She also claims that she had spent Rs. 5000/- for the treatment of her victim husband when he was admitted in injured condition in the G.B. Hospital.

6. Testimony of Shri. Indrajit Das, P.W. 2 was taken into consideration as eyewitness of the said accident who also has supported the claim by saying that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 3000/-, however, no documentary evidence was produced by both P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 in support of the claim of the income as well as the expenditure incurred on the treatment of the deceased. On the basis of the death certificate, certificate of postmortem emanation and other material documents, learned Tribunal has ascertained the income of the deceased as Rs. 1500/- at relevant time and has also indicated the age of victim as 40 years at the time of the said accident in question.

7. After applying the 2nd Schedule Rs. 2,52,000/- 3x2= Rs. 1,68,000/- was calculated as compensation to the claimants/appellants herein and adding Rs. 20,000/- towards the consortium and Rs. 1000/- as medical expenses and Rs. 2000/- as funeral charges. Thus, the amount of Rs. 1,92,000/- was indicated as the total compensation payable to the claimants with interest 12% per annum from the date of restoration of the petition i.e. 30.3.1996 till the date of payment within two months. It was also observed that if the said amount was not paid within two months, with interest @ 15% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of restoration of the case i.e. 30.3.1996 till the date of payment was payable.

8. It was also observed in the impugned award that Smti. Arati Da