By the Court.—All the appeals filed by different appellants under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the common judgment and order dated 30.8.1995, passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Faizabad, in Claim Petition No. 133 of 1993.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.9.1998, Sri Chhabi Nath Padney, husband and father of the claimants was going by an official car from Raebareli to Lucknow, from where he was supposed to fly to Geneva via New Delhi to attend a meeting. He was working as Additional General Manager in Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., Raebareli (in short, “ITI”). He was aged about 48 years. On the date of accident, he was going from Raebareli to Lucknow Airport in an official Ambassador Car No. UGB 4040. When the car reached near Microwave Station on Raebareli Lucknow road, about 8.00 p.m., it has collied with one loaded truck of iron rods. The car was driven by Sri Pratap Singh, who was holding a valid driving license and was an employee of the ITI. Sri Chhabi Nath Pandey was taken to Balrampur Hospital and K.G.M.C. Lucknow, lastly, to Sanjai Gandhi Post Graduate Institute, Lucknow, where after seven days, he died. The appellants-claimants have filed a claim petition for Rs. 8,00,000/-, out of which, a total claim of Rs. 7,54,000/- was awarded against the ITI and the National Insurance Company jointly and severely, who had provided the insurance cover to the Ambassador Car in question, but no liability was fixed on the Truck owner and the Oriental Insurance Company, who had insured the Truck No. URL-9855. Being aggrieved, the National Insurance Company Ltd., Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., as well as the claimants have filed present appeals.

3. With this background, Sri R.S. Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants (FAFO No. 276 of 1995) submits that the compensation is meager one. Ex gratia payment of Rs. Three Lacs has wrongly been deducted by the ITI from the total compensation awarded. He further submits that the employer has taken an amount of Rs. 65,228/- under the Workmen’s Compensation Act as a part of the compensation wrongly. The Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 11. He also submits that no compensation was awarded for the mental agony, pain and suffering as well as the future prospects. This is also a plea of the learned counsel for the appellant that no benefit of time pay scale of the deceased was given to family members. So, he made a request that the total compensation may be awarded more than Rs. 15,00,000/-. The ex gratia payment should not be a part of the compensation. For this purpose, he has relied on the ratio laid down on the following cases :

(i) Helen C. Rebello (Mrs) and others v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and another, 1999 SCC (Cri) 197;

(ii) State of A.P. and another v. K. Pushpalatha and others, 2007 (1) TAC 887 (AP);

(iii) The General Manager, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore v. Kwaja Hussain Shaiksab, AIR 1979 (Kar) 58;

(iv) A.P. Dorairaj v. State of Madras, AIR 1974 (Mad) 14;

(v) Pallavan Transport Corporation Ltd. (Metro) v. P. Murthy & etc., AIR 1989 (Mad) 14;

(vi) Harivadan Maneklal Modi and another v. Chandrasinh Chhatrasinh Parmar and others, AIR 1988 (Guj) 69;

(vii) The Branch Manager, the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmi Patra and others, AIR 1991 (Ori) 310;

(viii) Jyoti Kaul and others v. State of M.P. and another, AIR 2000 SC 3582;

(ix) Ramesh Chandra v. Randhir Singh and others, (1990) 3 SCC 723;

(x) Smt. Shashi Jain v. State of U.P., F.A.F.O. No. 57 of 1984, decided on 3.5.2002;

(xi) General, Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs) and others, (1994) 2 SCC 176;

(xii) National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s. Swaranlata Das and others, 1993 Supp. (2) SCC 743;

(xiii) National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava and others, (2008) 2 SCC 763;

(xiv) The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Saharanpur v. Shri Sude