IN THE COURT OF THE MEMBER,

MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO. III

KAMRUP, GUWAHATI

MAC Case No. 589/2012

Present : Sri S.K. Sarma,AJS.

Member,
M.A.C. T. No. III
Kamrup, Guwahati

1. Smt. Puja Paul

W/O Late Rajib Paul
(Wife of the deceased)

2. Miss Preety Paul

D/O Late Rajib Paul,
(Minor daughter of the deceased)

3. Smt Prava Paul,

W/O Sri Biswanath Paul
(Mother of the deceased)

4. Sri Biswanath Paul,

Village- Ananda Nagar, Bye Lane-5,
(Father of the deceased)

……… Claimants.

-Versus-

1. Sri Bhaskar Choudhury,

S/O Late Anil Ch. Choudhury,
(Owner of the vehicle No. AS-01-AE-0426)

2. Sri Biswaajit Das

 2

S/O Late Upendra Das

(Driver of the vehicle No. AS-01-AE-0426)

3. M/S TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited,

(Policy No. 010040666904 valid up to 07.06.12)
(Insurer of the vehicle No. AS-01-AE-0426)

……. Opposite parties.

Appearance :

For the claimants : Mr. Zafar Iqbal,

For the Opposite Party No. 1 : Mr. S. Singha, Mr. P. Das,

Md. I. Haque, Advocates.
For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. S. Singha
For the Opposite Party No. 3 : Mr. R. Goswami,
Mr. T. Kalita, Advocates

Date of argument : 19.03.2015.

Date of Judgment : 31.03.2015

J U D G M E N T

1. The claimants Smt Puja Paul and three others have preferred this claim
petition for grant of compensation on account of death caused to Late Rajib
Paul in a motor vehicle accident.
2. The case of the claimants is that on 08.01.2012 while Late Rajib Paul
the deceased husband of the claimant No. 1 and the father of the claimant
No. 2 and the son of the claimants No. 3 and 4 was traveling in vehicle No.
AS-01-AE-0426 (Santro, Zing RLX) as an occupant of the said vehicle, which
was proceeding from Guwahati side towards Digboi side and when the
vehicle reached near City Dhaba, Laipuli, Tinsukia at about 6.00 AM,
suddenly a cow came in front of the said vehicle and the diver of the Santro
 3

car applied hard brake to save the incident but the driver lost his control
over the said vehicle and met with an accident on the NH way 37 and as a
result of which the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the
same day.
3. The further case of the claimants is that at the time of the death of
the deceased was engaged in private service and earned Rs. 3,300/-per
month. He was about 25 years of age at the time of the accident. Therefore
the claimants have filed this claim petition claiming a compensation of Rs.
12,00,000/-.
4. The opposite parties have contested the case by filing written
statement.
5. The answering opposite party No. 1 who is the owner of the vehicle
No. AS 01 AE 0426 in his written statement submitted that he is the
registered owner of the said vehicle and he permitted the opposite party No.
2 to drive the said vehicle and at the relevant time of the incident said vehicle
was insured with the opposite party No. 3 and if any compensation is
awarded in favour of the claimants then the opposite party No. 3 is liable to
indemnify the answering opposite party No. 1.
6. The answering opposite party No. 2 who is the driver of the vehicle
No. AS 01 AE 0426 in his written statement admitted that at the relevant time
of the incident he was the driver of the said vehicle but he possessed the
valid driving licence and denied that the accident occurred due to his fault
and submitted to dismiss the case against him.
7. The answering opposite party No. 3 the Tata AIG General Insurance
Co. Ltd has denied about statement of allegation and wanted strict proof of
facts and documents such as age, occupation and income of the deceased
etc. The answering opposite party No. 3 has admitted that at the relevant
time of the accident vehicle No. AS-01-AE-0426 was insured with the
answering opposite party No.3 but denied about the involvement of the said
vehicle in the alleged accident and prayed to dismiss the liabilities of payment
of compensation against opposite party No.3.
 4

8. Upon the pleadings the following issues were framed as under :

(1) Whether the victim (Late) Rajib Paul died as a result of the
injuries sustained by him in the alleged road accident dated 08.01.12
involving vehicle No. AS-01-AE-0426 (Santro, Xing RLX) and whether the said
accident took place due to under use and involvement of the said vehicle ?
(2) Whether the claimant is entitled to receive any
compensation, and if yes, to what extent and by whom amongst the opposite
parties, the said compensation amount will be payable ?
9. The Claimants side has examined one witness. No witness examined
by the opposite parties.
10. I have heard argument of learned counsel of both sides. The
claimants side has submitted written argument also. Perused the evidence on
record and my decisions and reasons thereof are given as follows.

ISSUE NO. I

11. The claimant No.1 Smti Puja Paul appearing as PW-1 in her evidence
stated that on 08.01.12 while her deceased husband Rajiv Paul was traveling
in vehicle bearing NO. AS-01-AE-0426 (Santro, Xing RLX) as one of the
occupant of the said vehicle, which was proceeding from Guwahati side
towards Digboi side and when reached near City Dhaba, Laipuli, Tinsukia at
about 6.00 AM, suddenly a cow came in front of the said vehicle and the
driver applied hard brake to save the incident, as a result of which the diver
lost his control over the said vehicle and dashed against the railway barricade
on the NH way 37 and the vehicle turned turtle on the road, as a result of
which the deceased/ occupant of the said vehicle sustained injuries and died
on the said accident. She has stated that that the accident occurred due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle bearing registration
No. AS-01-AE-0426. She has exhibited the accident information report as Ext-
1, post mortem report as Annexure-1.
 5

In her cross examination not a single suggestion was given by the

defence side regarding the accident. The defence side has failed to rebut the
evidence of the P.W. 1 on material aspect. From the Ext. 1 the accident
information report found that in connection with the said accident one GDE
is made in Panitola OP under Tinsukia PS being GDE No. 182 dtd.08.01.2012
which reflects that the accident took place as a cow ran in front of the
vehicle No. AS 01 A E 0426 and the driver has lost control over the vehicle
and hit a rail track barricade near the rail track and Rajib Paul died as a result
of the said accident. As per the post mortem report annexure 1 the death
was instantaneous due to coma as a result of injuries sustained and all
injuries were ante mortem in nature and caused by blunt force impact .
13. In the present case though there is no eye witness to the accident,
but no any evidence is also adduced by the defence side.
14. In the case of Pushpabai Parshattam Udeshi and Ors.(supra)
there was no direct evidence as to how the accident occurred and no eye
witness also and in the said case the Hon’ble Supreme Court has applied the
maxim of “res-ipsa-loquitur” and observed that the accident spoke for itself,
so it was sufficient for the plaintiff to prove the accident when nothing
more could be proved. The onus then shifted upon defendant to prove that
the accident took place due to some other cause then his own negligence.
15. In the present case, the accident information report Ext.1
reveals the authenticity of the accident. Under such circumstances of the case
and in absence of the defence evidence and in the light of above observation
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it can be the accident occurred due to use of
the vehicle No.AS-01-AE-0426 and Rajiv Paul died as a result of the said
accident.
16. This issue is answered accordingly and in favour of the
claimants. .
Issue No. 2

17. In view of my discussion above as Rajiv Paul died as a result of the

accident occurred due to the use of the vehicle bearing registration No. AS
 6

01 AE-0426 as such the claimants are entitled to get compensation. Now the
question is what would be the just and reasonable amount of
compensation and from whom the compensation is recoverable.

.18. Claimant No.1 (PW.1) who is the wife of the deceased in her evidence
stated that at the time of death the deceased was 25 years which is also
supported by the post mortem report. As such the appropriate multiplier is
18.The P.W. 1 in her evidence stated that her deceased husband earned
Rs.3,300/- per month from private service. But not a single document is
produced regarding his income. Under such circumstance for the purpose of
computation of compensation the income of the deceased is taken as
Rs.3,000/- per month. As the deceased was below the 40 years of age, as
such 50% above the salary is to be added as future prospects. Thus the
amount comes to Rs.4,500/-per month. After deduction of 1/3 of his income
the loss of annual dependency would be Rs.36,000/-. So after taking 18 as
multiplier the claimants are entitled to get Rs.6,48,000/- as
compensation. That apart, the claimants also entitled to get Rs.
25,000/- as funeral expenses, and Rs. 1,00,000/- as loss
consortium. Thus the claimants are entitled to get Rs.7,73,000/-
as compensation together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of filing of the case till payment.

19 . As the vehicle No. AS 01 AE 0426 was insured with the answering

opposite party No.3 Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd as such the
Opposite Party No. 3 being the insurer of the said vehicle is liable to pay
the amount of compensation to the claimants.
20. This issue is answered accordingly.

A W A R D
21. Awarded Rs. 7,73,000 /- (Rupees seven lakh seventy three
thousands ) only in favour of the claimants as compensation. The
awarded amount shall carry interest thereon at the rate of 6% per
 7

annum from the date of the filing of the case till payment. The
opposite party No. 3 the Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. being the
insurer of the offending vehicle No. AS 01 AE 0426 is to pay the amount of
compensation to the claimants by way of cheque. Interim compensation if
any paid, shall be deducted from the amount of compensation.
22. Given under my hand and seal of this Court on this 31st day of
March, 2015.

(Mr.S.K.Sarma, AJS)
Member,M .A.C.T.No.3.
Kamrup(M),Guwahati

Dictated and corrected by me.

(Mr.S.K.Sarma,AJS)
Member, M.A.C.T.No.3.
Kamrup (M),Guwahati
8