IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
FAO No.168 of 2012 a/w FAO No.334 of 2012 Date of decision: 09.12.2016
1. FAO No.168 of 2012
.
Dolma Devi and others …..Appellants Versus
P
Mohinder Kumar Goel and others ….. Respon.dents
2. FAO No.334 of 2012
H
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. o f …..Appellant Versus t Dolma Devi and others ….. Respondents
Coram: r The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ma u nsoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice
Whether approved for r o eporting? Yes.
FAO No.168 of 2012
For the appe lla C nts: Mr.Pardeep Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For the h respondents: Mr.Vikrant Chandel, Proxy Counsel, for respondents No.1 and 2. g
Nemo for respondents No.3. i Mr.G.C. Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Meera Devi, Advocate, for respondent H
No.4. FAO No.334 of 2012 For the appellants: Mr.G.C. Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Meera Devi, Advocate, for the appellant. For the respondents: Mr.Pardeep Kumar Gupta, Advocate, for
respondents No.1 to 4.
Mr.Vikrant Chandel, Proxy Counsel, for
respondents No.5 and 6.
Nemo for respondent No.7.
1
2
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral) Both these appeals are directed against the common award, dated 15thSeptember, 2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., (for short, the Tribunal),.
in case MAC No.70 of 2007, titled Dolma Devi and o . thePrs vs. Mohinder Kumar Goel and others, whereby the claim petition was allowed and compensation to the tune of R s.1H7,83,640/- was awarded in favour of the claimants and the insufrer was saddled with the liability, (for short, the impugned awa rdo).
2. Feeling aggrieved, th r e c t laimants have filed appeal i.e. FAO No.168 of 2012 for en u hancement of compensation and the insurer has challenged o the impugned award by the medium of FAO No.334 of 2012 C on the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly saddled it with the liab ility. 3. h Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
ithg e record. 4. Admittedly, the deceased was a Constable in the
H
Police Department and was drawing Rs.13,064/- per month as salary. Salary certificate of the deceased was proved on record as Ext.PW-4/A. The deceased was 37 years of age at the time of accident. The Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 15. Keeping in view
the number of claimants i.e. 4, the Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th
from the monthly income of the deceased towards his personal
expenses.
3
5. Having said so, the Tribunal has rightly made discussion in paragraphs 16 and 17 of the impugned award and awarded compensation, which, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be meager or excessive. .
6. The insurer has questioned the impugned awar . d bPy the medium of FAO No.334 of 2012 on the ground that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving licence and th at Hthe owner had committed willful breach. Copy of the drivinfg licence has been proved on record as Ext.R-2, which doe s doisclose that the driver was having a valid and effective drivi r ng l t icence at the time of accident. The insurer has not led any u evidence to prove that the owner had committed willful brea o ch or violation of the terms and conditions contained in th C e insurance policy. The Tribunal, while determining issues No.3 a nd 4, has made detailed discussion and has rightly decided h the said issues against the insurer.
i7.g In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in both the appeals and the same are dismissed. Consequently, the
H
impugned award is upheld. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of. 8. The Registry is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants strictly in terms of the impugned award, through
their respective bank accounts, after proper verification.
4
CMP No.10100 of 2016 in FAO No.334 of 2012
9. This application has been moved by respondents/claimants No.2 and 3 with the prayer that they may be proceeded in the appeal in their individual capacity, since, during.
the pendency of the appeal, they attained the age of majo . ritPy. The application is allowed and the factum of claimants No.2 and 3 of their having attained majority is taken on record. H December 09, 2016 ( Mafnsoor Ahmad Mir )
(tilak) o Chief Justice ur
t
o
h
C
ig
H