JUDGMENT

Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, J. (Oral)

Counsel appearing for the appellants, after getting no objection from the previous counsel, files his Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

2. Present appeal has been filed by the appellants, being the petitioners-claimants in MACT case No.133 of 2004 dated 29.09.2004 (computerized case No. 52901C0006752005) for modification of the award/judgment dated 27.03.2006, passed by the Ld. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. Tribunal')by way of seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, on account of death of one Surjeet Muleen.

3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, on 28.07.2004 at about 09:00 A.M., deceased - Surjeet Muleen was going to his office situated at Sector 26, Chandigarh, from his residence at Sector 2, Panchkula, on his scooter bearing registration No. HR03-A-3782, which was being driven by him. When he reached near Railway Lights point, Mani Majra, suddenly a bus, bearing registration No.CH01-G-5864, struck him from back, which was being driven by respondent No.1 - Karnail Singh (driver) in a rash and negligent manner. Deceased - Surjeet Muleen fell down on the road along with scooter and rear wheel of the bus passed over his body, resulting in his death on the spot.

Regarding the said accident, FIR No. 161, dated 28.07.2004, under Sections 279 , 337, 304A of IPC, was registered against respondent No.1 with the Police Station Mani Majra (UT), Chandigarh.

4. For claiming damages, appellants (petitioners/claimants), who are related as widow and three children of the deceased, filed a claim petition before the Ld. Tribunal at Panchkula.

After completion of pleadings, Ld. Tribunal framed the following issues:-

I. Whether the accident, causing the death of Surjeet Muleen took place on 28.7.2004 due to rash and negligent driving of bus No.CH-01/G-5864 driven by respondent No.1 as alleged ? OPA

II. If issue no.1 is proved, whether claimants are entitled to compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom? OPA

III. Whether respondent no.1 was not having valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident as alleged? OPR-3

IV. Relief.

5. After proving of the happening of accident because of the rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, issue No.1 was decided against him and in favour of the appellants/petitioners-claimants. Thereafter, on the basis of record available before the Ld. Tribunal, total compensation amount of Rs. 7,85,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of institution of the claim petition till its realization, was awarded as payable in favour of the claimants, by assessing monthly income of the deceased - Surjeet Muleen as Rs. 19,377/- per month and multiplier was applied of 5.

Hence, the appellants are in appeal before this Court for seeking enhancement of awarded amount of compensation.

6. While addressing arguments, counsel for the appellants has relied upon the judgment of the Constitution Bench passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors., 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009, (Law Finder Doc Id #918174). Counsel also relies upon the judgment subsequently passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Smt. Anjali & Ors. v. Lokendra Rathod & Ors., 2023(1) RCR (Civil) 229, (Law Finder Doc I