JUDGMENT :

B. N. Mahapatra, J.

The present appeal has been filed at the instance of the Insurance Company challenging the judgment dated 26.11.2011 passed by the 2nd Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Northern Division, Sambalpur (for short, ‘Tribunal’) in MAC Case No.294 of 2003 (D) raising an important question relating to determination of compensation amount under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’).

2. The undisputed facts leading to filing of the present Appeal are that on 16.10.2003 at about 10 PM, while the deceased Prakash Samal was proceeding in the motorcycle bearing registration NO.OR-06T-5623 towards Dhenkanal, near Malati Chowdhary Talashilpa Prakalpa, Podapada on NH-42 (Cuttack-Sambalpur road), a Marshal Jeep bearing registration No.OR-02L-0186 came from opposite direction and dashed against him, as a result of which Prakash Samal received serious injuries and became senseless. Immediately, he was shifted to Dhenkanal District Headquarters Hospital and then to S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, where he succumbed to the injuries on the next day. At the time of accident, the deceased was 26 years old and was earning Rs.6,500/-per month as a Police Constable. The deceased is husband of respondent No.1, father of respondent No.2, son of respondent No.3 and brother of respondent No.4. The claimants filed claim petition against the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle claiming compensation of Rs.10.00 lakhs.

3. Before the Tribunal, the owner of the offending Jeep filed the written statements taking stand that the said Marshal Jeep was duly insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, Cuttack and it was driven by Amiya Kumar Behera, who had a valid driving licence and in case of any award, the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify her (owner). However, at the later stage, the owner of the offending vehicle has not contested the claim.

4. The Insurance Company filed written statements calling upon the owner of the vehicle to produce the insurance policy and took the plea of general denial to the averments of the claimants.

5. On the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues.

(i) Whether, the deceased Prakash Chandra Samal died due to vehicular accident on 16.10.2003 at about 10.00 PM near Malati Chowdhary Talashilpa Prakalpa, Podapada on NH-42 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of OR-02L-0186 (Marshal Jeep)?

(ii) Whether, the petitioner(s) is/are entitled to get any compensation? If so, from whom and to what extent ?

(iii) What other relief the petitioner(s) is/are entitled to?

6. In order to substantiate the claims, the claimants examined three witnesses out of whom PW-1 and PW-2 are the petitioners and PW-3 is an independent witness and all of them have relied on the documents of GR Case registered in connection with the said accident.

Opposite parties though have not adduced any evidence but the opposite party-Insurance Company had relied on the investigation report.

7. The learned Tribunal taking into consideration both oral and documentary evidence adduced/produced by the parties held that the deceased Prakash Ch. Samal died on account of vehicular accident caused by the Marshal Jeep bearing Registration No.OR-02L-0186 on 16.10.2003 and the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Learned Tribunal applied multiplier 17 to determine the dependency taking the age of the deceased as 26 years at the time of accident. Taking into consideration the salary certificate issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sambalpur of Constable No.896, the Tribunal held the gross income of the deceased to be Rs.5,715/-which included special pay of Rs.150/-, KMA Rs.75/-, CA Rs.75/-, SDA Rs.200/-. After deducting allowances and professional tax, the Tribunal assessed the net monthly income of the deceased at Rs.5,400/-. Further deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, the monthly contribution to