Back
2018 Supreme(Tri) 265
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
ARINDAM LODH, J.
National Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Raianggya Mog S/o Late Paindai Mog Ors. - Respondents
MAC App. 29 of 2017 Connected with CO(FA)01 of 2018
Decided On : 10-12-2018
For the Appellant : Mr. S.D. Choudhury, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. D.C. Roy, Adv.
The burden of proof lies upon the appellant to prove the claimants are not legal heirs, and the court may adjust compensation based on established legal principles.
Headnote:
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Motor Vehicles Act - Section 166 - 304 Part II of IPC - M.V. Act, 1988 - [166, 304 Part II]
Fact of the Case:
The claimants sought compensation for the death of Chaiwa Mog and her husband in a road traffic accident. The tribunal awarded compensation, which was appealed by the Insurance Company. The claimants also filed a cross-objection seeking enhancement of compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claimants failed to prove the deceased's monthly income and held that only the mother-in-law was entitled to compensation. The court also adjusted the dependency deduction and funeral expenses, ultimately awarding compensation to the mother-in-law.
Issues: The issues included determining the entitlement of the claimants to compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act and the identification of legal heirs of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the burden of proof lies upon the appellant to prove the claimants are not legal heirs, and adjusted the dependency deduction and funeral expenses based on legal principles established in previous judgments.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the cross-objection was dismissed. The Insurance Company was ordered to pay compensation to the mother-in-law, and a portion of the amount was to be kept in a fixed deposit.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 16.04.2016 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, No.1, West Tripura, Agartala in case No. TS(MAC)277/2014 wherein the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.9,92,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.
2. The cross objection was filed by the claimants and on agreement of the learned counsel for the parties both the appeal and the cross objection have been taken up together for disposal by a common judgment.
3. The claimant respondents No. 1 to 5 by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act have stated inter alia, that on 16.03.2016 Chaiwa Mog along with her husband Ulufru Mog was proceeding from Rupaichari to Agartala by a motor bike bearing registration No. TR03 E 5339 and when they reached Bishramganj at about 8.30 hrs the offending vehicle bearing registration No. TR01 W 1672 coming from the same direction at a high speed rashly and negligently dashed the motor bike from the back side. As a result, Chawia Mog along with her husband sprinkled under a truck bearing registration No. TRL 2843, which was in their front side. Consequently, both of them received grievous injuries on their head, chest and other parts of their body and on being taken to the nearby PHC they were declared dead. A police case was also registered with the Bishramganj P.S. being Bishramganj P.S. Case No. 20/2014 under Section 304 Part II of IPC against the driver of the Bolero Maxi Truck bearing registration No. TR01 W 1672.
4. It has been pleaded in the claim petition that Chaiwa Mog, the deceased was a private tutor having a monthly income of Rs.20,000/- and was about 26 years of age at the time of her death. Hence, they claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.46,90,000/-.
5. After receipt of the notice, owner of the Bolero Maxi Truck, being the OP No.1, has filed written objection and disputed the claim of the claimants. The OP No.1 has further pleaded that he has got all the valid vehicular documents and if any compensation is awarded that should be paid by the insurer of the vehicle.
6. The National Insurance Co. Ltd. being the OP No. 2, appellant herein, also denied and disputed the claims of the claimants by filing written objection.
7. On the basis of the pleadings and documents, the learned tribunal has framed the following issues:
“1. Did Chaiwa Mog sustain any injury on 16.03.2014 at about 0830 hours at Bishramganj on the National Highway in a road traffic accident involving the Bolero Maxi Truck bearing No. TR-01-W-1672 and the Pulsar Motor Bike bearing No. TR-03-E-5339 in which she was a pillion rider resulting in death the same day due to rash and negligent driving of the driver/rider of either or both the vehicles?
2. Are the claimants entitled to be compensated under the Provision of M.V.Act, 1988? If so, to what extent and who shall be liable to pay the same?”
8. After discussion on all the issues, the learned tribunal has quantified the compensation to the tune of Rs.9,92,000/- only along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 06.09.2014 i.e. from the date of filing of the claim petition, till the date of actual payment. Being dissatisfied with the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred the appeal.
9. By filing cross-objection, the claimant-respondents No. 1 to 5 herein, have sought for enhancement of compensation on the ground that the learned tribunal has not appreciated their claim that the deceased Chaiwa Mog was earning Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per month as a private tutor.
10. Heard Mr. SD Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Co. as well as Mr. DC Roy, learned counsel appearing for the claimant-respondents No. 1 to 5 as well as cross-objectors.
11. Having taken up both the appeal and the cross-objection together, I have perused the entire records and the judgment of the learned tribunal.
12
