The court upheld the principle of just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and considered the relevant provisions and observations of the Supreme Court in determining the compensation.

Rajes Kumar & Dinesh Gupta,JJ.: -

This appeal has been preferred against the award dated 17.1.2014 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ District Judge, Jhansi in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.573 of 2011.

2. The brief facts, which give rise to this appeal are that the claimants-respondents preferred Motor Accident Claim Petition No.573 of 2011 for compensation on account of death of her husband and father, who expired on 19.9.2011 in an accident.

3. According to the claim petition, the claimant's husband and father Ramesh Kumar met with an accident on 19.9.2011 at 8.30 P.M. at Jhansi to Lalitpur road near the village Hansari while he was going to his house from Jhansi driving scooter No.UP 93 F-7347. At that point of time from the opposite direction (from Lalitpur side) offending truck bearing Registration No. UA 04 D 4980, which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, hit the scooter from wrong side whereupon the deceased received grievous injuries resulting in his death. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Truck only. After the accident, the Driver of the Truck fled away.

4. It has been further pleaded that deceased was a skilled driver, who was working as mason and used to earn Rs. 300/- to 400/- per day. It has been further stated that against the Driver of Truck, First Information Report was lodged at case crime no. 415 of 2011 under Sections 279, 304-A I.P.C. on the next day i.e. 20.9.2011. The Driver of the offending truck was bailed out and the Truck was also released by the Court. The claimants have been depending upon the income of the deceased but due to the death of the deceased, they have been deprived from their dependency.

5. The opposite party no.1-owner of the Truck, Universal Cargo Movers Gora Pardhav Bareilly Road, Haldwani through its manager has filed its written statement.

6. It has been contended by the owner that the driver of the offending truck was going with slow speed from Lalitpur to Jhansi and he has reached near the village Hansari at about 8.00 P.M., the deceased who was driving the scooter rashly and negligently and collided with the Truck.

7. At the time of accident, the offending truck was insured with United India Insurance Company Limited-opposite party no.2.

8. The Insurance Company has also filed written statement and also taken the same plea as has been taken by the owner of the vehicle.

9. After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal gave a categorical finding on issue nos. 1 and 2 jointly and held that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the offending truck. A categorical finding has also been recorded that at the time of accident, the scooter was being driven by the deceased to his extreme left side whereas the offending truck was being driven by its driver to extreme right side which resulted in an accident resulting grievous to the deceased, who died later on. This finding was based on perusal of site plan, which was prepared by the investigating officer of the case.

10. On the point of compensation, the Tribunal held that the claimants are entitled for compensation under the conventional head on the loss of consortium to the spouse, loss of love, care, help, guidance to the children and funeral expenses. The Court has awarded Rs. 1 lac under the head of loss of consortium, Rs. 1 lac under the head of loss of care and guidance for minor children and Rs. 25,000/- for funeral expenses. The Court has taken the notional pay of the deceased at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month and accordingly 36,000/- per annum after deducting 1/3rd amount spent by the deceased on himself taken into the amount of Rs. 24,000/- per annum and also applying multiplier of 15 computed the compensation Rs. 3,60,000/- after adding the other compensation and toal amount of Rs. 5,90,000/- have awarded to the claimants alongwith 7% interest.

11. Feeling aggrieved, the Insurance Company preferred this appeal.

12. Heard Shri V.