Judgment:
N.M. Kasliwal, J.
1. Both these appeals are disposed of by one single order as they arise out of the same judgment given by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur dated July 28,1986.
2. I have heard Mr. K.K. Sharma for the claimant appellant. Mr. Srivastava, for the New India Assurance Company Limited and Mr. G.D. Mathur for Rajendra Singh owner of the truck in question. In an accident dated. October 17, 1981, Sarvan Kumar and Arti died. Smt Shanti Devi widow of Sarvan Kumar Arvind Kumar S/o. Sarvan Kumar and Kumari Archana daughter of Sarvan filed the claim petition. The claim petition was also filed by the above claimants for the death of Arti in the above accident. Both the claim petitions were consolidated and the claimants have been allowed the amount of Rs. 3,80,000/- by way of compensation for the death of Sarvan Kumar and Rs. 20,000/-for the date of Arti alongwith the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from April 9, 1982, the death of filing the claim petition. The liability of the insurance company has been fixed at Rs. 50,000/-according to law prevailing at the time of the alleged accident. The misc. appeal No. 12/1987 has been filed by the claimants for enhancing the amount of compensation in respect of the death of Arti. Misc. Appeal No. 62/1987 has been filed by Rajendra Singh, the owner of the truck to reduce the compensation of Rs. 3,80,000/- allowed on account of the death of Sarvan Kumar.
3. I shall first deal with the Misc. Appeal No. 12/1987, Mr. K.K. Sharma appearing on behalf of the claimant-appellants submitted that the learned Claims' Tribunal committed a serious error in awarding Rs. 20,000/- only by way of compensation on account of death of Arti. The learned Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10.000/-on account of loss of love and affection, Rs. 5,000/- on account of shock and mental agony and Rs. 5,000/- on account of future loss of income.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the parties in this regard. In my view Rs. 10,000/- has been rightly awarded for the loss of love and affection and calls for no interference. So far as Rs. 5,000/- awarded in respect of the mental agony, such amount could not have been awarded separately, but no interference can be made as no appeal or cross objection has been filed on behalf of the respondents challenging the award of the above amount to the claimants. Now, so far as the award of Rs. 5,000/- on account of future loss of income, in my view it is on a very low side. Arti, was aged about 14 years and student of 9th class, taking in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to allow the amount of Rs. 30,000/- under this head which relates to the income and financial help to be made in future by Arti, to the claimants. Thus, the appeal No. 12/1987 is allowed in part and the compensation of Rs. 20,000/- allowed on account of the death of Arti is increased of Rs. 45,000/-. The claimants would be entitled to an interest of 12% per annum on the aforesaid amount from the date of filing the claim petition till payment. However, it is made clear that the amount already paid by the insurance company to the claimants shall be adjusted in the aforesaid amount. The insurance company is permitted to hand over the draft of the amount of compensation to Mr. K.K. Sharma, learned Counsel for the claimants-appellants in the presence of the Additional Registrar of this court within two months. The draft would be payable as account payee in the name of Smt. Shanti Devi widow of Sarvan Kumar.
5. In Misc. Appeal No. 62/1987, I have heard Mr. G.C. Mathur for the appellant and Mr. K.K. Sharma for the claimant-respondents, and Mr. S.C. Srivastava for the New India Assurance Company Limited.
6. So far as the amount of Rs. 3,60,000/- allowed by way of compensation on account of future loss of income, I see no ground or justification to interfere in the award given by the learned Tribunal. I also find no ground to interfere in the amount of Rs. 5,000/- awarded on account of the loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- on account of loss of consortium. The Tribunal was however, wrong in awarding the amount of Rs. 10,000/- on account of mental agony and shock when the amount of Rs. 5,000/- has already been awarded on account of loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- on account of loss of consortium. Thus, the appeal No. 62/1987 is allowed in part and the total compensation awarded as Rs. 3,80,000/- stands reduced to Rs. 3,70,000/-.
7. With the above modification, rest of the award given by the Tribunal is maintained.