Liability of the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the calculation of compensation under various sections of the Act.

JUDGMENT :

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.

This appeal from order arises out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pauri Garhwal dated 31.08.2017 passed in MACP No. 11 of 2016, whereby a compensation of Rs. 3,36,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Thirty Six Thousand only) has been awarded to the claimants along with an interest rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing the claim petition.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Sonu (deceased) was the driver of the vehicle bearing registration no. U.K.12CA/0352. On 15.06.2012 at about 09:00 P.M., when he was plying the vehicle from Nainidanda to Baijro-Pauri, near Village Sukai, Birokhal, the vehicle met with an accident, as a result of which, driver of the vehicle Sonu sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.

3. On account of the death of Sonu in a motor accident, a claim petition was filed by the claimants seeking a compensation of Rs.27,54,000/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakh Fifty Four Thousand only). It was alleged in the claim petition that the deceased was 28 years of age and was getting Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) per month as salary.

4. Written statements were filed by the owner of the vehicle as well as the Insurance Company, with which the vehicle involved in the accident, was insured.

5. On the basis of the rival pleadings of the parties, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:-

"1. Whether the accident took place on 15.6.2012, at about 9:00 P.M., near Village Sukai (Bironkhal) by the vehicle bearing No. U.K. 12 CA-0352, due to technical fault in the vehicle, consequently, deceased Sonu, who was driving the offending vehicle, sustained grievous injuries and died?

2. Whether the accident occurred due to own negligence of the deceased (driver)?

3. Whether all the relevant documents of the offending vehicle and driving licence of its driver were not valid and effective at the time of accident?

4. To what amount of compensation, if any, the claimants are entitled and from whom?"

6. So far as issue nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that on the fateful day, the offending vehicle No. U.K.12 CA-0352 met with an accident, in which deceased Sonu, who was driving the offending vehicle, sustained injuries and died on the spot.

7. So far as issue no. 3 is concerned, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that at the time of accident, all the documents of the offending vehicle, including the driving licence of its driver were valid and effective.

8. As regarding the quantum of compensation, the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) per month i.e. Rs. 36,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Thousand only) per annum. Keeping in view that the deceased was a bachelor, one-half amount was deducted towards personal expenses and the annual dependency income was calculated by the Tribunal as Rs. 18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand only). Thereafter considering the age of the deceased as 28 years at the time of the accident, a multiplier of 17 was applied by the Tribunal and a compensation of Rs. 3,06,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Six Thousand only) was calculated.

9. Apart from the above, the learned Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) towards loss of estate, Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) towards funeral expenses. Thus a total compensation of Rs. 3,36,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Thirty Six Thousand only) has been awarded as compensation by the Tribunal.

10. Aggrieved the insurance company has filed the present appeal.

11. The only ground taken by the insurance company is regarding its liability. It does not dispute the amount of compensation determined. According to the appellant/insurance company, the driving licence which was with the driver was of light motor vehicle and the licence clearly stipulated that it is not for the t