JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The original claimants as appellants not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C. No.9) at
Mahesana in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.295 of 2006
under its judgment and award dtd. 3/4/2007, has filed
this Appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 ("the Act" for short). Vide judgment and award dtd. 3/4/2007, the claim petition filed by the appellants came to be allowed in part and compensation of
Rs.1,33,000.00.00 has been awarded with an interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of claim petition till its realization.
(2.)The facts in brief are;
2.1 The appellants herein are parents of deceased Mahesh Baldevji Thakor. When the appellants with their two children namely Mahesh and Mukesh were crossing the road on 21/3/2006, while going to village Sankhpurda, at that time, one Maruti Car No.GJ-02-R-8064 came with full speed, in rash and negligent manner and dashed with Mahesh, because of which, he died on the same day during treatment. For the said accident, the appellants as original claimants filed claim petition under Sec. 166 of the Act seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000.00 with cost and interest.
2.2 It was case of appellants in the claim petition that the deceased Mahesh was 12 years of age and studying in 4 th Standard having bright future in front of him. The accident occurred on account of sole negligence on part of the driver of the offending vehicle (Maruti Car) and because of untimely death, the appellants are entitled for the compensation as claimed.
2.3 The Tribunal, after hearing the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred on account of sole negligence on part of the driver of Maruti Car. In relation to compensation, the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.1,33,000.00.00 as noticed herein-above with the interest @ 9% from the date of claim petition till its realization with proportionate cost and interest.
(3.)Heard learned advocate Mr.A.V. Prajapati for the appellants and learned advocate Mr. Dakshesh Mehta for
respondent No.2-Insurance Company. As liability has not
been denied, presence of respondent No.1 (driver of
Maruti Car) is not required. Record and Proceedings of the
Tribunal have been secured.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.