JUDGMENT

Jaspreet Singh, J.

Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Rao, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Anchal Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.2. Shri R. P. Singh, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.3 and none has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.4 in FAFO No.413 of 2022.

2. The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT by the claimants seeking enhancement in the award dated 29.08.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/District Judge-II, Lucknow in Claim Petition No.209 of 2006 (Smt. Kusum Tiwari and others v. Virendra Kumar Maurya and others) whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.12,08,000 alongwith 7% interest payable from the date of the petition till the date of final payment and deducting three years interest therefrom.

3. Briefly the facts giving rise to the instant appeals are that Nar Singh Narayan Tiwari, a lawyer by profession, on 05.09.2004 was travelling in his Maruti Van number U P 32 AG 6515 and was on his way to Unchahar while at around 03:00 PM near Police Station Mohanlalganj on the Lucknow-Raebareili road, a mini bus bearing number UP 32 AN 2445 was being driven rashly and negligently which came from wrong side and hit the vehicle being driven by Nar Singh Narayan Tiwari. In the said accident, he suffered grievous injuries while his wife also suffered injuries but later Nar Singh Narayan expired. In view of the death of Nar Singh Narayan, the claim petition was filed by his wife, daughter and two sons as claimants which was registered as Claim Petition No.209 of 2006. The claim came petition to be contested by the Insurance Company as well as the driver and owner Virendra Kumar Maurya. The bus in question was being plied under a contract by the UPSRTC and it belonged to Virendra Kumar Maurya and was being driven by Surendra Kumar Sharma. The bus was said to be insured with the United India Insurance Company Ltd. However, while contesting the claim, amongst other pleas, it was also stated that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the deceased and not that of the mini bus.

4. Upon exchange of pleadings, the Tribunal framed five issues and after considering the oral and documentary evidence, it held that the accident occurred solely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing number U P 32 AN 2445 and in the said accident the deceased Nar Singh Narayan did not contribute. It also found that as per the version given by the eye-witness, it was the bus driver who was rash and negligent and while overtaking a truck he hit the Maruti Van of the deceased by coming on the wrong side. The bus was found insured with the Insurance Company and its driver also possessed a valid and subsisting driving license. While considering the compensation, the Tribunal considered the income tax returns of the deceased and taking note of the aforesaid, considered the final annual income of the deceased to be Rs.1,60,000/- Considering the age of the deceased to be 53 years applied a multiplier of 11 and thereafter added a small sum towards loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses and as a result a total sum of Rs.12,08,000/- was awarded alongwith 7% interest.

5. The Tribunal also noticed that the appellants had delayed the proceedings, therefore, it refused to permit interest for three years by means of the award dated 29.08.2016 and it is this award which is under challenge before this Court in the instant appeal seek