Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:16273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No.1578 of 2016 Judgment reserved on : 27.02.2025 Judgment delivered on : 07.04.2025 Digitally signed by RAMAKANT NIRALA 1 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Durg, Rajendra Park Chowk, Durg, Teh./District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, Through Manager Divisional Office, Parmanand Bhavan, Rajendra Park Chowk, Durg, Teh./ District- Durg, Chhattisgarh versus Appellant 1 - Smt. Varshabai alias Aneshwari Deshmukh W/o Late Indra Kumar Deshmukh, Aged About 40 Years 2 - Kumari Shikha Deshmukh, Aged About 20 Years 3 - Bhupesh Deshmukh Aged About 18 Years Respondent Nos.2 and 3 father Late Indra Kumar Deshmukh, All R/o Village Dhangaon, Post Chourel, Thana- Arjunda, Tehsil Gundardehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh .................Claimants 4 - Arun Kumar Nayak S/o Netram Nayak, Aged About 46 Years R/o Urla Road, Ramnagar Baigapara Durg, Thana Pulgaon, Teh./ District- Durg, Chhattisgarh…………...Driver 5 - Sunil Kumar Sahu S/o Dashratlal Sahu, Aged About 46 Years R/o Near To Rani Laxmibai Chwok, Trilochan Bal Mandir, Kelabadi, Durg, Teh. and District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ...............Owner Respondent(s) 2 MAC No.629 of 2017
Legal Reasoning
1 - Smt. Varsha Bai Urf Aneshwari Deshmukh Wd/o Indrakumar Deshmukh, Aged About 40 Years 2 - Kumari Shikha Deshmukh D/o Late Indrakumar Deshmukh, Aged About 20 Years 3 - Bhupesh Deshmukh S/o Late Indrakumar Deshmukh, Aged About 18 Years All R/o Village Dhangaon, Post Chourel, Police Station Arjunda, Tehsil Gunderdehi and District Balod, Chhattisgarh Appellants/claimants Versus 1 - Arun Kumar Nayak S/o Netram Nayak, Aged About 46 Years R/o Urla Road, Ram Nagar Baigapara, Durg, Police Station Pulgaon, Tehsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh ..............Driver Of Vehicle Bus No.C.G.07 E 0670 2 - Sunil Kumar Sahu S/o Dasrathlal Sahu, Aged About 46 Years R/o Near Rani Laxmi Bai Chowk, Trilochan Bal Mandir, Kelabadi, Durg, Tehsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh ..............Owner Of Vehicle Bus No. C.G.07 E 0670 3 - The Oriental India Insurance Company Limited, Durg, Rajendra Park Chowk, Durg, Tehsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh, Through Manager, Divisional Office, Parmanand Bhawan, Rajendra Park Chowk, Durg, Tehsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh ..............Insurer Of Vehicle Bus No. C.G.07 E 0670 Respondent(s) For Appellants For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Advocate in MAC No.1578/2016 and Ms. Pragya Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Nilesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate in MAC No.629/2017 : Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Advocate for respondent No.3 in MAC No.629/2017 and Ms. Pragya Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Nilesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 in 3 MAC No.1578/2016 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey C A V Judgment 1. Since both these appeals arise of common award and claim case number, therefore, the same are heard together and are being decided by a common order. 2. MAC No.1578/2016 has been filed by the non applicant No.3/insurance company against the impugned award, whereby the liability to pay compensation to the claimants has been levied upon the appellant insurance company. 3. MAC No.629/2017 has been filed by the claimants on this ground that the award amount is on the lower side, as such the same needs to be enhanced. 4. Brief facts of the case are that on 14.09.2015 when the deceased Indrakumar Deshmukh and Srinivas Rao were going in motorcycle from Balod to Dhangaon then in between Village Kohangatola and Ghumka, the non applicant no.1 Arun Kumar Nayak while driving the offending vehicle Bus No.CG07E0670 coming from wrong side rashly and negligently hit the motorcycle causing the death of deceased Indra Kumar during treatment on 20.09.2015, whereas Srinivas Rao also received injuries. Subsequently, a claim case was filed by the family of the deceased Indra Kumar before the learned Tribunal, which was partly allowed and the claimants were awarded Rs.16,59,000/- in 4 their favour. Being aggrieved by the award impugned, the present appeals have been filed by the claimants and the insurance company. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants in MAC No.629/2017 submits that the impugned award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal runs contrary to the facts and evidence available on record. The learned Claims Tribunal has committed grave legal error in assessing the income of the deceased and 100% future prospect has not been considered by the learned Tribunal and 1/3rd income for personal expenses has also been wrongly deducted. The income of the deceased has also been wrongly calculated. and likewise the amount on other heads is also on meager side. Therefore, the impugned award needs to be modified by enhancing the award amount. Reliance has been placed on the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Chandra alias Chanda alias Chandraram and another vs Mukesh Kumar Yadav and others, reported in (2022) 1 SCC 198 and this Court’s judgment dated 22.07.2020 passed in MAC No.1059/2013 in between Smt. Geeta Bai and others vs Surya Bahadur Yadav and others. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant insurance company in MAC No.1578/2016 submits that in absence of any document of income, the learned Tribunal has wrongly calculated the income of the deceased as Rs.12,000/- per month, whereas there is no document of income on record to show the same. The learned 5 Tribunal has wrongly awarded excess compensation on conventional heads and interest on the award amount has also been wrongly considered without there being any documentary evidence available on record. The deceased was only doing the work of selling of vegetables, but the said aspect of the matter has totally been ignored by the learned Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned award may be modified. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents in both the appeals objected to each other’s arguments. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. The insurance company only objected to the amount of award, as such it is not disputed that on 14.09.2015, non applicant No.1 driving the vehicle No.CG-07-E-0670 in rash and negligent manner dashed the motorcycle of the deceased Indra Kumar, due to which Indra Kumar sustained severe injuries and died during treatment. It is also not proved before the learned Tribunal that the owner and driver, non applicant No.1 & 2 breached the conditions of insurance policy. As per insurance company the learned Tribunal company awarded compensation on higher side in favour of the claimants. 10. The learned Tribunal in para 19 calculated the income of the deceased as Rs.12000/- pm on this ground that the deceased Indra Kumar was registered owner of vehicle Tata-S and he used 6 this vehicle for his vegetable selling. The learned Tribunal appreciated this fact that the claimant Varsha Bai did not file any income/return or any income proof, but it is proved that Indra Kumar was the owner of Tata-S vehicle and he used this vehicle for selling vegetable in market and looking to the status of the deceased, the learned Tribunal rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.12,000/- pm and yearly income as Rs.1,44,000/-. The learned Tribunal deducted 1/3rd amount towards his personal expenses and looking to the age of the deceased as 44 years at the time of incident, the learned Tribunal applied multiplier of 14 as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, thus the appeal filed by the insurance company is without any merit and is liable to be dismissed. 11. It is clear from the records that the learned Tribunal did not calculate future prospects to the claimants and in separate heads also, no amount was awarded in favour of the claimants. Thus, the impugned award needs to be modified in the following manner:- Sr. No 1. 2. 3. 4. Head Amount awarded Amount awarded by the Tribunal Income of the deceased Rs.13,44,000/- Loss of estate and Rs.1,00,000/- by this Court Rs.13,44,000/- Rs.1,50,000/- consortium Loss of love and Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- affection Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/- Rs.25,000/- 7 5. Medical expenses Rs.90,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- including attendant and transportation Future prospect 6. Nil 6. Total Rs.16,59,000/- Rs.57,600/- (40 % of the yearly income of the deceased). Rs.17,76,600/- Thus, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.17,76,600/-, but since the claimants have already been awarded Rs.16,59,000/- by the learned Tribunal, therefore, they are entitled to Rs.1,17,600/- only as enhanced amount of compensation after deduction (Rs.17,76,600 – Rs.16,59,000/- =Rs.1,17,600/-) with 8 % interest per annum from the date of filing of claim petition before the learned Tribunal to til its actual realization. The enhanced amount if any received by the claimants in advance shall be adjusted. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the claimants i.e. MAC No.629/2017 is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified, whereas the appeal filed by the insurance company bearing MAC No.1578/2016 is dismissed. Nirala Sd/- Rajani Dubey Judge