The principle of 'pay and recover' can be invoked in cases where the insurance company is directed to pay the compensation to the claimants and then recover the same from the registered owner of the vehicle.

JUDGMENT

1. The present civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ’the Act of 1988’) against the judgment and award dated 08.08.2016 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dausa, District Dausa (District and Sessions Court Dausa) (for short ’the Tribunal’) in claim application No.462/2011, by which the claim petition filed by the claimants appellants was allowed and respondent No. 1-Govind Singh-owner of the vehicle has been directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5,58,000/-(including misc. heads) with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition and the insurance company has been exonerated.

2. Counsel for the appellants submits that the age of the deceased was 35 years at the time of accident and as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation: (2009) 6 SCC 121, the multiplier of 16 should have been applied looking to the age of the deceased but the multiplier of 15 has been applied. Counsel submits that the date of accident is 16.05.2011 and at the relevant time, the minimum wages of unskilled labour was Rs. 3,510 per month but in the instant case the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 36,000 per annum. Counsel submits that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. : (2017) 16 SCC 680, the claimants were entitled to get 40 per cent amount for the future prospects and the Tribunal has not granted a single penny and while deciding Issue No. 4 the respondent insurance company has been exonerated from its liability to pay compensation by holding that the vehicle was insured for private use and the deceased was traveling in the vehicle in the capacity of a passenger. Counsel submits that in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Anu Bhanvara Etc. Vs. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited and Ors., reported in AIR 2019 SC 3934 directions could have been issued to the Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants and then recover the same from the registered owner of the vehicle. Counsel submits that in view of the submissions made hereinabove, the finding recorded on the issue No. 3 is liable to be modified and the amount of compensation needs to be enhanced.

3. Perusal of the record indicates that in spite of service of notice, respondent No.1 has not put in appearance before this Court.

4. Per contra, Counsel for the respondents submitted that the Tribunal has not committed any error while deciding issue No. 3. Counsel submits that the vehicle was insured for private use only and there was no co-operative policy. Hence there was a breach of the terms and conditions of the policy and the Tribunal has not committed any error in exonerating the Insurance Company.

5. Heard and considered the submissions made by the counsel for the respective parties and the perused the record. The undisputed fact on the record is that the deceased was travelling in the vehicle on 16.05.2011 and the vehicle was met with an accident in which he sustained injuries and died. This fact is not in dispute that at the time of the accident, the age of the deceased was 35 years. This fact is also not in dispute that while deciding issue No. 4 the Tribunal has committed an error in applying the multiplier of 15 while the multiplier of 16 should have been applied in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Supra). This fact is not in dispute that the minimum monthly wages of skilled labour was Rs. 3,510 at the prevailing time when the accident occurred but the Tribunal has assessed the annual income as Rs. 36,000/-. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Anu Bhanvara (Supra) has dealt with the principle of pay and recover as under:-

"11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as well as th