Ratio
Lodging of FIR with the police regarding the accident or police investigation thereon is not always a condition precedent for awarding the claim for the injury/death suffered in motor accident.

These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the claimants and the Insurance Company respectively against the Judgement and Decree dated 15.07.2008 made in MCOP.No.3537/2005 by the learned II Judge, Small Causes Court (MACT) Chennai, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,54,948/-as compensation to the appellants in CMA.No.4107/2008, who are the husband, two minor children and father of the deceased Asha, who died in the motor accident that had occurred on 2.3.2005.

2. The brief facts are that on 2.3.2005 at about 8.20 a.m. at Chinmaya Nagar, the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider in the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.10-B-6043 owned by her younger brother V.Shankar, who is the 1st Respondent in CMA.No.4107/2008 driven by her youngest brother V.Arunachalam for going to the School where she was employed as a Teacher. Due to rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle, the motorcycle slipped into an uneven rough and dipping surface on the road, as a result of which, the deceased fell down and sustained severe head injuries. She was immediately taken to the Surya Hospital, Chennai and despite intensive treatment given to her, she succumbed to the injuries on 11.3.2005 in the said hospital. The accident was intimated in writing to the Inspector of Police, Pondy Bazaar with a copy marked to the Dean of the Hospital. According to the claimants, the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle and thus, they claimed a sum of Rs.15,30,000/- as compensation.

3. The Appellant Insurance Company resisted the claim by filing a counter denying the allegations made in the claim petition, stating that the accident had occurred only due to the carelessness and negligent act of the pillion rider. It is further contended that there was no coverage in the policy for the pillion rider. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle. The Tribunal, taking into account that Ex.R2 policy is the package policy wherein the pillion riders are covered, held that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation.

4. For the purpose of computing the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.5000/-p.m. and after deducting 1/3rd towards her personal expenses, by applying the multiplier of 13, computed the total loss of dependency at Rs.5,19,948/-. To this, the Tribunal has added Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.10,000/- for the loss of consortium and Rs.20,000/- for the loss of love and affection and in all, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,54,948/- as total compensation to the claimants with interest at 7.5 per cent p.a. from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved against the same, both the claimants and the Insurance Company have filed these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals.

5. The 4th claimant, besides examining himself as PW.1, examined the eye witness to the occurrence as PW.2 and the Doctor, who treated the deceased, while she was admitted in the Surya Hospital, as PW.4. The Manager of Chinmaya Vidhyalaya School, where the deceased was employed as a Teacher, was examined as PW.3. On the side of the Appellant Insurance Company, the Administrative Assistant of the Insurance Company was examined as RW.1 and the private investigator of the Insurance Company was examined as RW.2.

6. PW.1, the father of the deceased, has deposed that on account of the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle, who is none other than his youngest son, the motorcycle slipped into the uneven rough and dipping surface, as a result of which, the deceased fell down and sustained fatal injuries. He had denied the suggestion made to him by the Insurance Company that he had not seen the accident. In fact, his evidence indicated that he was living with his daughter, as he is a widower. Apart