Delay in filing FIR should not be fatal for claim proceedings if satisfactory and cogent reasons for the delay are demonstrated by the claimant.

ORDER :

As both these appeal arise out of the same award, these are being decided by common order.

2. M.A.No. 4093 of 2018 has been filed by the Insurance Company for exonerating it from the liability to pay compensation or reducing the compensation amount and M.A.No. 2799 of 18 has been filed by the claimants for enhancing the amount of compensation.

3. Both these appeals arise out of the award dated 7.5.2018 passed by the 14th AMACT, Bhopal in claim case No. 568/2016.

4. Brief facts of the case are that injured Naeem Khan along with Raees Khan was returning home on Motor Cycle bearing registration no MP04-NZ-3842 owned by father of injured Naeem Khan. As soon as they reached Highway by-pass road, Gram Barkheda Bonder, PS Khajuri Sadak, Bhopal at that fateful moment on 13/02/2016 the insured vehicle dashed the divider due to rash and negligent driving by Raees Khan and hence only claimant sustained severe injuries including head injury. Naeem Khan through Guardian Mother filed the claim petition for grant of com-pensation to the tune of Rs. 74,00,000 along with interest against driver Raees Khan and Kallu Khan, father of the injured.

5. The owner and driver of the offending vehicle were proceeded ex-parte.

6. The Insurance Company filed the reply and denied all the allegations and pleaded that it is a case of implant of insured vehicle as the FIR was lodged with delay of 6 days.

7. Learned Tribunal framed the issues and recorded the evidence and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,38,000/- with interest to the claimants.

8. Being aggrieved by the impugned award, the Insurance Company filed this appeal on the ground that the F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of 6 days of the accident, no information was given by the owner of the motor-cycle to the police and the Insurance Company. No information was given by the owner of motor cycle to police and Insurance Company and no in formation was given by Authority of Hospital to the Police. Even nobody disclosed the kind of vehicle as well as number of vehicle to anyone by which the accident occurred. Therefore it is clear that the story of claimant is concocted to extort undue compensation. Further it was pleaded that it is a case of breach of condition of insurance policy as the driver of the insured vehicle did not possess valid and effective driving license.

9. On these grounds, the Insurance Company prays that the appeal be allowed and the appellant/ Insurance Company be exonerated from liability to pay compensation. In the alternative, the amount of compensation be reduced.

10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents prays for rejection of the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company.

11. MA 2799 of 2018 has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. He contended that the trial Court assessed income of the injured at Rs.5,000/- per month, which is inadequate looking to the fact that at the time of the accident i.e. 13.12.2016, according to the notification issued by the Labour Ministry, income of unskilled labour is Rs.6,950/- per month. He submits that compensation should be calculated accepting monthly income as Rs.6,950/-, adding future prospects, applying suitable multiplier etc.

12. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company con-tended that the Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation on higher side and prayed for rejection of the appeal preferred by claimant i.e. MA.No.2799 of 2018.

13. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

14. First of all, let take into consideration appeal preferred by Insurance Company i.e. MA.No. 4093 of 2018. The Insurance Company contended that the F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of 6 days. According to the FIR, Ex. P/1 accident occurred on 13.02.2016 and on 19.02.2016 ASI went to Tripti Hospital for enquiring PCLC Sanha. It is settled principle of law that delay in filin