Fixing a deceased's income based solely on a salary certificate without examining the issuer or producing supporting wage registers is improper; in such instances, the court should apply a reasonable notional income to calculate compensation.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company challenging the award and decree dated 22.11.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.314 of 2017 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy (for short “the Tribunal”), wherein the Tribunal granted a total compensation of Rs.21,00,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization as against the claim of Rs.12,00,000/- for the death of one Mohd. Zakeer (hereinafter referred as “the deceased”) in a motor vehicle accident.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased was working as driver of lorry bearing No.AP-25-W-5859. On 10.03.2017, the deceased started at 11.00 P.M., from Narsingi village after loading the rice in his lorry and when the lorry reached near Raikal Toll Plaza, one lorry bearing No.KA-01-AA-1548 (hereinafter referred as “the crime vehicle”) was stopped on the road without signals or indicators, the deceased who was driving his lorry could not observe the lorry stationed in the middle of the road and dashed the lorry, but however, he tried to avoid the accident, but the lorry which was driven by the deceased hit by the side, due to which the lorry fell down and the rice bags in the lorry also fell on the deceased, due to which he died on the spot. The Police, Shadnagar have registered a case for the offences under Sections 304-A and 337 of IPC against the driver of the crime vehicle. The respondents filed the aforesaid claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- for the death of the deceased. Upon evaluating the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the crime vehicle and awarded an amount of Rs.21,00,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company.

3. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record, as the claimants merely relied upon Ex.A.6–salary certificate without examining its author or the owner of the lorry, and without producing supporting documents such as wage registers. It is further contended that the Tribunal erred in placing reliance on the testimony of an interested witness and, in the absence of any proof of actual payment of salary, wrongly fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month. Such assessment, according to the learned counsel, is excessive, contrary to settled legal principles, and therefore the award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants contended that the Tribunal, upon proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, has passed a well-reasoned order warranting no interference by this Court. It is further contended that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable, and therefore the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is liable to be dismissed.

6. Regarding the question of negligence, the Tribunal, upon due consideration of Ex.A.1–F.I.R. and Ex.A.2–charge sheet, rightly held that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the crime vehicle.

7. As see