The assessment of compensation must ensure fairness and reasonableness while considering income, future prospects, and applying the appropriate multiplier based on the deceased's age.

JUDGMENT :

Sushil Kukreja, J.

1. The instant appeal is maintained by the appellant/Shriram General Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as “the appellant”), under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT (for short “the Act”), against the award dated 02.06.2015, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. in MAC Petition No.23-N/2 of 2010, with a prayer to quash and set aside the same.

2. Briefly facts of the case, giving rise to present appeal, are that the claimants/petitioners (respondents No.1 & 2 herein and hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act before the Tribunal below, whereby they sought compensation to the tune of rupees five lacs on account of death of Kumari Pooja, who was daughter of petitioner No.1-Rukmi Devi and sister of petitioner No.2-Master Ankur. As per the petitioners, deceased Kumari Pooja died in a motor accident on 21.07.2009 involving truck bearing registration No.HP-17B-4052, near place Naligaar in between village Kafota and Tillordhar, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, HP. It was further averred that on 21.07.2009 when the deceased alongwith Ripu Daman, after attending a fair in village Kafota, reached near Naligaar in between village Kafota and Tillordhar, truck bearing registration No.HP17B-4052 came from behind and struck against them and pushed them out of the road, due to which, Pooja Kumari sustained grievous injuries on her person, resulting into her death on the way while she was being taken to the hospital. Thereafter, her postmortem was conducted at Civil Hospital, Paonta Sahib on 22.07.2009. Ripu Daman also sustained injuries in the said accident.

3. As per the petitioners, the deceased, who was aged about 18 ½ years, was running a tailoring and embroidery stall at her house and was also selling milk to a tea stall at Tillordhar. She was earning Rs.6,000/- per month from tailoring, weaving and selling of milk. The offending vehicle was owned by Jai Singh (respondent No.3 herein) and it was insured with Shri Ram General Insurance Company (appellant herein). It was also averred that the deceased was hale and hearty young girl, hence, the petitioners sought compensation to the tune of rupees five lacs alongwith interest.

4. The appellant/Insurance Company filed reply to the claim petition, wherein preliminary objections that the driver was not holding a valid driving license, that the vehicle was being plied in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, that the vehicle was not having a valid permit and that the petition was filed in collusion with owner and driver of the vehicle were taken. On merits, it was averred that the deceased was unemployed and she had no income. It was also averred that no accident had taken place in the manner as projected and a false report had been manipulated in order to get undue compensation and the amount claimed was highly excessive.

5. Respondents No.1 & 2/owner as well as driver of the offending vehicle, in their joint reply to the claim petition, raised preliminary objections of maintainability and locus standi. On merits, it was specifically denied that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver (respondent No.2). It was averred that on 21.07.2009, there was a local fair at Kafota and due to heavy rain, the truck was being driven in a normal speed, however, because of mud/slippery condition of the r