High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
-1- Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2025:CGHC:15643 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR NAFR MAC No. 168 of 2022 The New India Assurance Company Limited Through- Its Divisional Manager- Divisional Office No. 3, R D A Building, Raipur (C.G.) versus ... Appellant 1 - Prabha Sahu Wd/o Late Rakesh Sahu Aged About 23 Years R/o Mandirpara, Giraud, P.S. Dharsinwa, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Ramnaresh Sahu S/o Baisakhuram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Mandirpara, Giraud, P.S. Dharsinwa, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Lata Bai W/o Ramnaresh Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Mandirpara, Giraud, P.S. Dharsinwa, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 4 - Tauheed Ahmad S/o Mustaqeem Ahmad, C/o - Nirbhaya Transport, Heerapur, Raipur, Tehsil And Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) (Driver). 5 - Sardar Sammat Singh S/o Chandan Singh Dari, Nirbhaya Transport, Boudhnagar Ward, Ballarpur, Tehsil- Ballarpur, Distt. Chadrapur, (Maharashtra) (Owner). ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)
Legal Reasoning
For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board -2- 03.04.2025 1) The appellants/insurance company has assailed the award passed by the learned XIIth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No.159/2018 dated 30.09.2021, whereby the award of Rs. 19,90,200/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application 05.03.2018 till its realization has been passed and the Insurance Company has been directed to deposit the amount of compensation within a period of 60 days, failing which the award amount would carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum. 2) Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the learned Tribunal committed an error of law in awarding 50% additional compensation under the head of future prospects, particularly when the deceased was neither a permanent employee nor a government servant. He contended that the deceased was working as a daily-rated employee at Radhakrishna Enterprises and was earning Rs. 325 per day. Therefore, the claimants are not entitled to get 50% additional sum for future prospects. He would further submit that the findings of the learned tribunal with regard to interest on the compensation amount are not consistent. In paragraph 38, the Tribunal stated that the compensation would carry 9% interest from the date of the application till realization, however, in paragraph A, it is held that if the compensation would not be deposited within 60 days, it will carry 12% interest. Again, in paragraph B, it is stated that the Insurance Company is liable to pay interest at 9% from the date of application till realization. He submitted that -3- there was no reason or justification for imposing penal interest @ 12% per annum and therefore he prays for modification of the award. 3) On the other hand, Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, learned counsel for the claimants, would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Gupta and submit that the deceased was working as a permanent employee of Radhakrishna Enterprises and earning Rs. 325/- per day. With respect to interest, he submitted that the Tribunal has rightly granted 60 days to deposit the compensation, and in the case of failure, the compensation amount shall carry penal interest @ 12% per annum. He further submitted that the Tribunal failed to award 10% additional compensation under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, in accordance with the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017 (16) SCC 680]. 4) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5) In the present case, the deceased, aged 22 years, died in a road accident on 15.06.2017 at about 7:00 PM near Dharsiva, Raipur, after being hit by the offending vehicle bearing registration No. MH-34-AB-6068. The claimants claimed compensation of Rs. 23.60 lakhs. The learned Tribunal recorded findings that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently, resulting in the death of the deceased. The learned Tribunal also held that the Insurance Company could not prove contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. It is also held that there was no breach of the terms of the insurance policy and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, passed the -4- award as referred to in the opening paragraph. 6) The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the matter of Pranay Sethi (supra), in paras 59.3, 59.4 & 59.8, laid down guidelines on future prospects and conventional heads. The same are reproduced as under:- “59…. 59.1…. 59.2…. 59.3. While determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was below the age of 40 years, should be made. The addition should be 30%, if the age of the deceased was between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary less tax. 59.4. In case the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years should be regarded as the necessary method of computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component. 59.5… 59.6… 59.7…. 59.8. Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. The -5- aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years.“ 7) In the present case, the deceased was not a permanent or government employee. The claimants failed to produce salary slips or any kind of deductions from the salary of the deceased. The attendance register (Ex. P/12) clearly proves that the deceased was a daily-rated employee. Therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have granted 40% additional sum on the head of future prospects, and the Tribunal erred in granting 50% additional sum. 8) With respect to interest, the Tribunal’s findings are inconsistent and unclear. In para 38, the Tribunal awarded 9% interest from the date of application till realization. However, in para A, it is stated that if the compensation is not deposited within 60 days, it will carry 12% interest. Again, in para B, it is stated that the amount of compensation will carry 9% interest. 9) Considering the fact that the Insurance Company has already deposited 75% of the award amount and that the findings recorded by the learned tribunal on interest are shaky; in the opinion of this Court, the entire award shall carry uniform interest at 9% from the date of application till its realization. 10)Further, it is evident that the learned Tribunal failed to award an additional 10% amount under the head of loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, as mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), therefore, the award requires reconsideration. 11)The compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is produced under:- -6- S. No. Heads Amount 1. 2. 3. loss Total contributions of dependency Rs. 12,16,800/- In terms of future possibilities Rs. 6,08,400/- Under traditional heads Rs. 1,65,000/- Total Rs. 19,90,200/- 12) Accordingly, the additional compensation for future prospects is reduced from 50% to 40% and at the same time, the claimants shall be entitled to get an additional sum of 10% for the loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses. Thus the final compensation amount is being recalculated as under:- S. No. Heads Amount 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Loss of dependency contributions Rs. 12,16,800/- Future Prospects (40 %) Rs. 4,86,720/- Loss of Estate (10% addition) Rs.16,500/- Loss of consortium (10 % addition) Rs.1,32,000/- Funeral Expenses (10 % addition) Rs. 16,500/- Total Rs.18,68,520/- 13)In the light of the above calculation, the amount of compensation is reduced by Rs. 1,21,680/-. The insurance company shall pay accordingly. The rate of interest shall be 9 % from the date of application till the date of its realization. -7- The balance amount, if any, shall be paid by the insurance company to the claimants within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The rest of the terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact.
Decision
14) As a result, the appeal is allowed in part. (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Sd/- NADIM