Point of Law : Since the deceased was a bachelor, so 50% of the income of the deceased is required to be deducted with a presumption that had the deceased been alive, he could have spent 50% for his personal and living expenses.

JUDGMENT :

MALASRI NANDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd as well as Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1/claimant and Mr. R.K. Bhatra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4/National Insurance Company Limited.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd, insurer of the vehicle AS-01T-3595 (Indigo Car) challenging the judgment and order dated 23.12.2010 passed by the learned Member, MACT Nalbari in MAC Case No. 285/2006.

3. The brief facts of the case is that on 16.07.2006, the son of the claimant Biren Kumar Sarma was travelling in a vehicle AS0-1T-3595 (Indigo Car) from Guwahati to Sivasagar along with staff of newspaper (Natun Somoy) and when they reached near Jorhat at about 5.30 A.M. another vehicle bearing no. AS-23D-6371 (truck) coming from opposite directions in a rash and negligent manner knocked down the vehicle bearing no. AS-01T-3595. As a result, the driver of the vehicle (Indigo Car) and son of the claimant Biren Kumar Sarma died on the spot. After the accident, one case was registered vide Jorhat P.S. Case No. 381/06 under Section 279/338/304A/427 IPC. At the relevant time of accident both the vehicles were duly insured.

4. The respondent no. 1/claimant filed the claim case before the MACT Nalbari praying for compensation on account of death of her son Biren Kumar Sarma. After completion of the trial, the learned Member, MACT, Nalbari awarded compensation in favour of the claimant by fastening both the Insurance Companies to pay on equal share 50% each of the awarded amount.

5. It was urged by learned counsel for the appellant Mr. R. Goswami that while assessing the compensation for the death of a bachelor, instead of making a deduction of 50% from the income of the deceased, has made a deduction of 1/3rd only resulting in excessive compensation to the respondent no. 1/claimant, who is the mother of the deceased. As the respondent no. 1 was the sole claimant there was no good reason to make any deviation from the law laid down in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298.

6. Another contention argued by learned counsel for the appellant is that the allegation in the claim petition as well as in the evidence adduced by the claimant was against the driver of the offending truck bearing no. AS-23D-6371 only and not against the Vehicle No. AS- 01T-3595 (Indigo Car) which was insured by the appellant. Though the learned Member, MACT Nalbari discussed the contention of both sides but without any rhyme or reason came to a finding that both the vehicles which were involved in the accident were equally liable to pay for compensation, which requires to be interfered.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 Mr. R.K. Bhatra, appearing for the National Insurance Company, has argued that both the vehicles collided each other and head on collision implies contributory negligence. Learned Tribunal has rightly delivered the judgment fastening both the Insurance Company to pay 50% of the awarded amount. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 has placed reliance on the following case law:

(i) Bijoy Kumar Dugar vs. Bidya Dhar Dutta and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 242

8. On the other hand, Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1/claimant has submitted that as per P.M. report, the deceased was 38 years of age, but the Tribunal has wrongly taken up the age of the deceased as 40 years, while calculating the award. Learned counsel has also drawn attention of the Court that no interest was given by the learned Tribunal on the awarded amount which is against the settled position of law. It is further contended that learned Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- t