Credible oral evidence proves self-employed income sans documents; 40% future prospects for unorganized sector deceased under 40; conventional heads fixed at Rs.15,000x3 + Rs.40,000 consortium.

JUDGMENT :

VIRENDER SINGH, J.

1. Both the aforesaid appeals are being decided by a common judgment, as these appeals have arisen out of the award dated 1.4.2017, passed by the Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Solan, District Solan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Tribunal’), in Claim Petition No. 15-S/2 of 2013, titled as, Kamla & others vs. M/s Som Dutt Builders Pvt. Ltd. & others.

2. By way of award dated 1.4.2017, the learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition filed by respondents No.1 to 3, in FAO No. 424 of 2017 by awarding a sum of Rs. 17,65,000/-, along with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till deposit. However, the ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has been fasten upon the appellant-Insurance Company.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present lis are, hereinafter, referred to, in the same manner, as were, referred to, by the learned Tribunal.

4. Brief facts, leading to the filing of present appeals, before this Court, may be summed up, as under:-

The claimants, being widow, minor daughter and minor son of deceased Dhan Bahadur had filed the claim petition, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the M.V. Act’), seeking compensation on account of death of Dhan Bahadur, who expired in a roadside accident, which, according to the claim petition, had taken place on 16.3.2011, in village Dangyari near Naina Tikker, on Kumarhatti-Nahan road, tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmour, H.P., involving vehicle No. HP 71-5105 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’), owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2, and insured with respondent No. 3.

4.1 According to the claimants, the accident had taken place on 16.3.2011, on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2, in which, predecessor-in-interest of the claimants had sustained fatal injuries. After the accident, he was taken to Regional Hospital, Solan, from where, he was referred to IGMC, Shimla. However, keeping in view the serious condition, he was further referred to PGI, Chandigarh, but, on the third day of the accident, he had expired.

4.2 The information regarding the accident was given to the Police, upon which, FIR No. 15/2011, dated 16.3.2011 was registered under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC, with Police Station, Pachhad, District Sirmour, H.P. Since, the accident had solely been attributed to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2, as such, claimants have sought compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 12% interest per annum, from the date of accident, till its realization from the respondents.

5. When put to notice, the claim petition has been contested by the respondents.

6. Respondents No. 1 and 2 had filed their joint reply, in which, factum of accident has not been disputed. Other contents of the claim petition have been denied by them. However, factum of registration of the FIR has impliedly been admitted by pleading that contents of para-9 as matter of record.

7. The Insurance Company of the offending ve