The main legal point established is the requirement for just and proper compensation in motor accident claims, considering the deceased's income, dependents, and the principles outlined in the Motor Vehicles Act, Section 163-A.

JUDGMENT :

Rajeev Gupta, J.-The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Rudraprayag vide award dated 6.10.2004 in M.A.C.P. No. 5 of 2004.

2. The claimants, who are unfortunate parents of the deceased Pushkar Singh, claimed compensation of Rs. 10,00,000 (rupees ten lakh) for his death in the motor accident on 25.10.2003, when the bus bearing registration No. UP 06-1536, in which he was travelling, met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of its driver resulting in the instantaneous death of Pushkar Singh on the spot itself. The claimants pleaded that their son Pushkar Singh, who was aged about 27 years, used to earn about Rs. 5,000 per month as cable operator.

3. The insurer and the owner of the offending bus had contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants. The owner took the plea that the accident occurred due to sudden mechanical failure and as such, the driver was not responsible for the accident. The insurer, on the other hand, pleaded that the bus was being plied in breach of the policy conditions and the driver was not holding a valid driving licence.

4. The claimants examined Shobhan Singh, PW 1 and Sandeep Singh Negi, PW 2, in support of their claim, whereas the insurer and the owner of the bus did not examine any witness.

5. The Tribunal, on the evidence led by the parties, held that the claimants' son Pushkar Singh died on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25.10.2003; the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus; and that the insurer of the bus was liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

6. The Tribunal found that the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was not reliable. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, awarded lump sum of Rs. 1,20,000 as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Pushkar Singh. The Tribunal further directed the insurer to pay interest on the amount of compensation at the rate of 8 per cent per annum in the event of its failure to deposit the amount of compensation on or before 30.11.2004. The record reveals that the amount of compensation was deposited by the insurer on 9.11.2004.

7. Mr. G.S. Negi, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 only to the claimants for the death of their son aged about 27 years. The learned Counsel, placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Manju Devi v. Musafir Paswan 2005 ACJ 99 submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded at least Rs. 2,25,000 as compensation to the claimants.

8. Mr. T.A. Khan, the learned Counsel for New India Assurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 1, on the other hand, supported the award and submitted that as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the Tribunal was left with no other option but to award lump sum compensation.

9. The findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal that the claimants' son Pushkar Singh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25.10.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus; and the insurer of the bus was liable to pay compensation to the claimants have, now, attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award.

10. True, the evidence led by claimants about the income of the deceased is not of clinching nature and as such, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the evidence led by the claimants in that behalf. Nevertheless, the lump sum compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 awarded by the Tribunal, in our opinion, is too low and deserves to be enhanced suitably.

11. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Tribunal/court should be awarded just and proper compensation in the