Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra, through the Executive Engineer, Public Works Division No.1, Gadchiroli, filed an appeal against the judgment and award dated 21/10/2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No.214/1994. The Tribunal had allowed the claim petition and directed payment of total compensation of Rs.1,88,600/- to the claimants (respondent Nos.1 and 2, the parents of the deceased) along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the petition until full satisfaction. The facts not in dispute were that the victim, Sanjay Suresh Shahu, aged about 19 years, was employed as a mechanic-cum-helper in Arvind Auto Works (respondent No.3) for a monthly salary of Rs.1,200/-. He died in a motor vehicle accident on 15/09/1993 at about 5.45 p.m. when Nilkanth Suryawanshi (respondent No.4) drove a motor vehicle belonging to the appellant on the pretext of a test drive from the garage of respondent No.3, and the deceased came under the front wheel and died as a result of the accident caused by truck bearing registration No. MTG-9200. The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The appellant contended that the compensation awarded was excessive and sans legal evidence. The High Court perused the impugned judgment and award and found that while calculating compensation, the monthly income of the victim was notionally considered as Rs.1,200/- per month, which was the amount the claimants alleged the victim was earning as a mechanic. The Court found no fault with this calculation, noting that it is an average monthly income for any able-bodied adult doing the work. The Court held that just compensation is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying well-settled principles. The Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, confirming the Tribunal's award.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Just Compensation - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appeal challenged the award of Rs.1,88,600/- as excessive and without legal evidence. The High Court held that the monthly income of the deceased was notionally considered as Rs.1,200/- per month, which is average monthly income for any able-bodied adult doing the work. Just compensation is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying the well settled principles relating to award of compensation. The appeal was dismissed as there was no merit. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was excessive and sans legal evidence.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No.214/1994 dated 21/10/2003 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Just compensation is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable
- on the facts and circumstances of the case
- to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong
- as far as money can do so
- by applying the well settled principles relating to award of compensation
