JUDGMENT :

Raghubir Dash, J.

1. Both the appeals arise out of the award dated 2.11.2012 made in MACT Case No. 345 of 2005 by the Member, 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar determining the just compensation at Rs. 13,70,000/-. Appellants in MACA No. 97 of 2013 are the petitioners/claimants and the appellant in MACA No. 82 of 2013 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. D. Laxman Raju and M/s. Tata Motors Limited, Jamshedpur who are arrayed as respondents in both the appeals as opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 before the learned Tribunal are the owner and manufacturer, respectively, of the offending vehicle.

2. The claim for compensation was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the Act) claiming a sum of Rs. 40 lakhs as compensation on account of death of the deceased, namely, Premananda Bebarta in a vehicular accident taking place on 27.1.2005 at about 6.30 P.M. at Gandhi Chowk, Balugaon Bazar. The offending vehicle is a Truck bearing Registration No. JH-05-A/6529/P/05.

3. It is not understood as to why the manufacturer of the offending vehicle has been arrayed as a party in the claim case. He did not appear before the Tribunal and was set ex parte. The owner of the vehicle filed a rejoinder but did not participate in the proceeding. The Insurance Company challenged the petitioners' claim denying the validity of driving licence and insurance of the offending Truck. Before the Tribunal the claimants claimed that the deceased was having income from his business in garments and one Poultry Farm. His total income was more than Rs. 15,000/- per month. It was further contended that at the time of his death he was 37 year of old. He left behind the petitioners as his dependants. Petitioner No. 1 is his widow, petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are minor daughters and petitioner No. 4 is his old mother.

4. The learned Tribunal having considered the evidence adduced before it came to a conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and/or negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. Though the impugned award reveals that the Insurance Company denied the insurance of the offending vehicle, no issue has been framed on that count and there is no observation anywhere in the impugned award as to whether the offending vehicle was under the coverage of insurance issued by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., the appellant in MACA No. 82 of 2013. However, the appeal memo is silent on the insurance matter and it is simply states that the Insurance Company had taken a specific stand that the driver of the Truck had no valid driving licence. The award has been challenged by the Insurance Company on several grounds but none of the ground is with regard to the absence of insurance coverage. Therefore, this Court presumes that there is no dispute about the offending vehicle being covered under insurance policy as on the date of accident.

Determining the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 10,000/- and applying the multiplier of 12, the learned Tribunal calculated the total loss of income and after deducting 1/4th of the total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, the loss of dependency was worked out at Rs. 13,50,000/-. Besides this amount, the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 5,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. It also awarded cost of Rs. 1,000/- and allowed interest at the rate of 7% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment. The claim petition was, accordingly, allowed ex parte against opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, the manufacturer and the owner of the Truck, and on contest against opposite party No. 3, the Insurance Company and directed the awarded amount to be paid by the Insurance Company.

5. The Insurance Company challenges the impugned award on the grounds that the monthly income of the deceased fixed notionally by the Tribunal is not only arbitrary but also highly excessive havi