Claims Tribunal has jurisdiction to award compensation for loss of income arising from property damage in motor accidents, but speculative damages are impermissible.

1. National Insurance Company Limited questions award dated 31st of May, 2004 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu, awarding an amount of Rs. 1,44,000/- (Rupees one lac and forty four thousand) with interest @ 9% per annum pendente - lite in File No. 174 / Claims, on a claim preferred by first respondent, Abdul Karim, seeking compensation for the death of a buffalo owned by him, which died on spot because of the rash and negligent driving of Matador No. JK - 02F - 9657, which hit it while moving along with the herd near Interrogation Centre, Jammu.

2. This respondent's claim was contested by the Insurance Company, which had sought permission to contest it on grounds other than those, which were available to an insurer under the Motor Vehicles Act, inter alia, on the ground that the claim was irrational, illogical and highly exaggerated.

3. The Tribunal raised four issues to resolve the matter in dispute between the parties. The issues read thus :
"(1) Whether on 14-7-1998 (97), because of the rash and negligent driving of veh JK02F / 9657 by respondent driver, petitioner's she buffalo received serious injuries and died of the same? OPP
(2) If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative to how much amount of compensation, petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP
(3) Whether respondent driver did not possess valid driving licence and it was driven against the terms and conditions of policy? OPR
(4) Relief.

4. The Tribunal, accordingly, appreciated the evidence led by the parties and recorded its findings on the issues framed in the petition. The Tribunal, on the basis of its findings, held the driver of the vehicle negligent in driving the vehicle and causing injuries to the buffalo of the first respondent. Issue No. 3 was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the Appellant - Insurance Company, meaning thereby that the vehicle in question had been driven against the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, because the driver did not hold a valid driving licence to drive the vehicle. While deciding Issue No. 1, the Tribunal held that the first respondent had been getting an amount of Rs. 100/- (Rupees one hundred) per day by selling milk of the buffalo and had, thus, been deprived of his income, which he would have got for a period of another four years because the buffalo would have survived for another 4 years, providing income to the first respondent for all these years. The Tribunal, accordingly, assessed the total loss of income of the petitioner on account of death of the buffalo at Rs. 1,44,000/- and, accordingly, passed the impugned award by providing that the Appellant would be entitled to recover the awarded amount along with interest thereon from the owner of the vehicle.

5. Shri Jugal Kishore, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, has raised an interesting question of law that the Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to assess and award compensation for the loss of income suffered by the first respondent, because of the loss of his buffalo. Shri Jugal Kishore submits that Tribunal could, at the most, award the cost of buffalo to the first respondent and nothing more than that. Learned counsel refers to General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Saraddamma reported as 1987 ACJ 926 : AIR 1989 Kerala 23 and Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Bhaskaran reported as 1992 ACJ 133, to support his submission regarding interpretation of the expressions "damages" and "compensation" as these so appear in S.165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 .

6. Shri Rajnesh Oswal, learned counsel for respondent - 1, on the othe