IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the calculation of compensation must consider the deceased's income, appropriate multiplier, and future prospects, independent of any pension received by the dependents.

JUDGMENT :

J.J. Munir, J.

This is an appeal by the claimants of Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 48 of 1992, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

2. According to the claimant-appellants, who are dependents of the late Rajvir Singh, the deceased, on the 2nd of December, 1991 was proceeding from Roorkee to Meerut on board Maruti Car, bearing registration No. DNC-2281. He was travelling on the car alongwith Raj Kumar and some others. The car was moving according to the rule of the road and at a controlled speed. At forty minutes past seven in the evening, as the car reached the Village Siwaya, a bus, owned by the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'UPSRTC'), bearing registration No. UHN-2268, approached from the opposite direction. It was driven at the high speed of about 70 kilometers per hour and negligently. It hit the Maruti Car, leading to injury being sustained by several persons. One Raj Kumar died on the spot. Rajvir Singh, who sustained grievous injuries, was admitted to the Medical College Hospital. He breathed his last on 3/4.12.1991. A First Information Report about the accident was lodged with the Police, leading to the registration of a case. Rajvir Singh's body was sent to autopsy, that was carried out at the P.L. Sharma Hospital, Meerut.

3. According to the claimant-appellants (for short, 'the claimants'), the deceased was a Constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police and aged thirty-six and a half years at the time of his demise. He was a healthy man and in the usual course of life would have gone on to celebrate his 85th birthday. The deceased was in receipt of a total salary of Rs.1961/- per mensem. Due to Rajvir Singh's untimely demise, the claimants have been destituted and left without a source of income. The claimants have also been denied their love and affection. A compensation in the sum of Rs.8,10,000/- was, accordingly, claimed.

4. A written statement was filed on behalf of the UPSRTC, who are opposite party No. 1 to the claim petition and respondent No. 1 to this appeal. The UPSRTC have generally denied the allegations in the claim petition. The particulars of the accident have been denied, leading to Rajvir Singh's death. It has been averred that burden lay upon the claimants to establish the factum of the accident. It is the further case of the UPSRTC that the accident did not happen on account of negligence of the bus driver, but it is a case of contributory negligence, where the bus driver and the driver of the Maruti Car ought to share the liability in equal proportion. It was also pleaded that the compensation sought is excessive and without basis. The case further pleaded is that compensation cannot come to the claimants as a lottery or windfall.

5. A written statement was filed on behalf of the National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Haridwar through the Divisional Manager, Begum Bridge, Meerut, opposite party No. 4 to the claim petition and respondent No. 4 here, who are Insurers of the Maruti Car. The Insurance Company aforesaid took a stand that it is the claimants' burden to establish the factum of the accident and all other things necessary to entitle them to compensation. It was the Insurance Company's case that the car was not being driven negligently and not responsible for the accident. It was the offending bus alone, that has to be held liable. The Insurance Company too said that the compensation demanded was excessive.

6. Upon pleadings of parties, the following issues were framed (translated into English from Hindi) :

''1. Whether the accident in question happened on 2.12.1991 at 7.40 p.m. in the jungle of Shivaya, Police Station Daurala, Meerut on account of negligent driving at a high speed by the drivers of bus No. UHN-2268 and Martu car No. DNC-2282? If yes, its effect.

2. Whether the claimants are entitled t