A.B. Pal, J.
1. A nine year old boy was knocked to death by the vehicle No. MZ-03-1279 owned by the second respondent herein on 22.1.2004 at about 6 p.m. at Kolasib. Following the said accident Kolasib P.S. Case No. 16 of 2004 under Section 279/337/338 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. The father of the victim instituted on 18th May 2004 the motor accident claim Case No. 55 of 2004. The claim was contested by M/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., the appellant herein, on all grounds on permission obtained under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act as the owner of the vehicle did not finally contest. The claim case came to be finally decided by the motor accident claims tribunal, Aizawl by judgment dated 9.2.2005 whereby an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest at the : ate of 9% per annum from the date of filing i.e., 8.5.2004 till realization of the amount was awarded. Aggrieved, the Insurer has preferred the present appeal calling in question the correctness of the assessment made by the learned Tribunal while awarding the compensation.
2. I heard Mr. George Raju, learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurer and Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Counsel for the claimant-respondent.
3. Mr. George Raju, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the challenge to the judgment and award is only to the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs awarded by the tribunal which is excessive if the age and background of the deceased is correctly taken into consideration. He fairly admits that there is no dispute to factual aspects as it has been well proved that the boy was knocked to death by the said vehicle insured with the appellant. According to him the learned tribunal after making a reference to a decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in R.S. Rawat and Anr. v. Tilak Raj and Ors. reported in 2004 (2) TAC 700 (P & H) awarded Rs. 2 lakhs without making any independent assessment in the present case seemingly because the said High Court awarded Rs. 2 lakhs for the death of a child of six years old. It escaped notice of the learned tribunal that the background of the boy died in Tilak Raj (supra) is not in perimeteria with the background of the victim of the case in hand. In Tilak Raj (supra), the father of the victim was a Army Major which was a factor considered by the said High Court observing that as the father of the victim was holding a very high position in Indian Army % the deceased had the high prospect of studying up to the highest level. In the present case the father of the victim is a cultivator and, therefore, there can be no reason to take a view that the deceased child had high prospect. Two facts being fully dissimilar it was not appropriate for the learned tribunal to award the same amount of Rs. 2 lakhs. Placing reliance on a decision of this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mustt. Samsunessa Laskar and Ors. reported in 2000 (1) GIT 477 in which an award of Rs. 1,58,500/- for death of a boy aged 10 years was reduced to Rs. 75,000/- only and on a decision of the Supreme Court in Kapil Kumar v. Kudrat Ali and Ors. reported in (2002) 4 SCC 33 7 where an amount of Rs. 50,000/- was awarded for permanent disablement, Mr. George Raju, would submit that by no method of calculation the amount of compensation in the instant case can exceed 75,000/-. It is his strong submission that the judgment and award in question being unreasoned one deserves to be interfered with by reducing the amount from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 75,000/-only.
The learned Counsel for the claimant-respondent on the other hand advanced the submission that the principles laid down by the Apex Court for awarding compensation in a line of decisions would suggest that the compensation must be on both pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads. In other words, loss of a son is bound to cause immense emotional suffering to the parents which cannot be measured by any scale and such a loss must be same to all parents what ever may be their backgrounds. The argument of the learned Counsel is that the accident having taken place in 2004 the erosion in the money value has not in all probability escaped the consideration of the learned tribunal while awarding Rs. 2 lakhs.
4. In Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar reported in : (2001)IILLJ1559SC the Apex Court held that compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs for death of a child up to age of 15 years is appropriate. Though in the case on hand the claimant is a cultivator, the same alone cannot be a good reason to take a view that the deceased would have no prospect of being established in life and extend financial assistance to his old parents. That apart, physical and emotional support in old age from the children is another important aspect which cannot be overlooked. The parents in the instant case have all on a sudden been deprived of such a prospect. Though the learned tribunal has not given details of his calculation in the judgment, but a careful appreciation of the materials on record would lead to the irresistible conclusion that even though there may be two views one being that the amount is a little on the higher side, that is not a good ground to interfere with the award which is not otherwise unjust.
5. For the view taken and the discussions made above this appeal by the Insurer does not appear to have any merit and consequently the same is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost.