The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal precedents and principles from the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to assess just and reasonable compensation for motor accident claims.

J.R. Goyal, J.-Since, both the appeals arise out of the same accident which took place on 20.10.1989, they are being disposed of by this common Judgment .

2. In short, facts of the case are that on 20.10.1989 at about 2.45 p.m. deceased Naeem Bux was going alongwith Karimuddin by scooter bearing registration No. RPI 532 on Delhi bypass. The scooter was being driven by deceased Naeem Bux, Near Idgah, truck bearing registration No. HYU 1555, being driven by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently came from the opposite side and hit their scooter, resulting in spot death of Naeem Bux. Karimuddin sustained serious injuries.

3. Father and mother of deceased Naeem Bux filed MAC case No. 69/1990 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Jaipur City and claimant injured Karimuddin filed separate MAC case No. 189/1990. Both were decided, by the learned Tribunal, by a common Judgment .

4. Aggrieved by the Judgment passed by the leaned Tribunal, these appeals have been preferred for enhancement of the compensation.

CMA 98/1995 (MAC 69/1990)

5. Learned Tribunal, considering the age of deceased Naeem Bux 25 years and that of his father Nabi Bux and mother Smt. Sayeedan as 62 years and 60 years respectively, assessed the income of deceased Rs. 1,500/-, per month, dependency Rs. 700/-per month i.e., Rs. 8400/-per year, and applied multiplier of 8 for determining the loss of dependency which comes to Rs. 67,200/-. Further, Rs. 15,000/-was also awarded for untimely death of their son and loss of estate. Thus, total compensation of Rs. 82,200/-was awarded.

6. Learned Counsel for the appellants contended that learned Tribunal assessed the income of deceased Naeem Bux Rs. 1,500/-per month, but wrongly determined the dependency Rs. 700/-per month, which is on a very lower side. It has also been contended that in view of the Judgment of Honble Apex Court in Shanti Bai & Ors. vs. Charan Singh & Ors., 1998 ACJ 848, which was a case of child death, minimum compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-should have been awarded.

7. Learned Counsel for the respondent Insurance Company contended that deceased Naeem Bux was earning a definite amount and after proper appreciation of the evidence, learned Tribunal rightly assessed the income of deceased Rs. 1500/-per month and dependency Rs. 700/-, and considering the age of claimants father and mother, applied multiplier of 8, which cannot be said to be unjust or improper.

8. I have considered the rival contentions. The case of claimant appellant was that their deceased son Naeem Bux was earning Rs. 2000/-per month, however, no definite proof of the income of the deceased was adduced before the learned Tribunal. Learned Tribunal, after proper analysis, assessed the income of deceased Rs. 1500/-per month, which does not warrant for interference.

9. So far ratio laid down in the case of Shanti Bai (Supra) is concerned, the same is not applicable in the instant case as that was a case of child death, while in the instant case deceased was a earning person and compensation is to be assessed in view of the Judgment of Honble the apex Court rendered in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. Trilok Chandra, 1996 ACJ 831.

10. So far dependency of Rs. 700/-per month, determined by the learned Tribunal, is concerned, in my opinion it cannot be said to be just and reasonable. Adopting the usual formula and after deducting one-third amount on account of personal expenses of the deceased out of his income, dependency is determined Rs. 1000/-per month i.e., Rs. 12000/-per year. Multiplier of 8, adopted by the learned Tribunal, appears to reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Thus, loss of dependency comes to Rs. 12000 x 8 = 96,000/-. Adding Rs. 15,000/-, as awarded by the learned Tribunal for ultimately death of the son of claimants and for loss of estate, total compensation comes to Rs. 96000 + 15000 = Rs. 1,11,000/-.

11. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed and award passed by the learned Tribunal is