Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2025:CGHC:17697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 518 of 2020 1 - Smt. Rukhmani Tandon Wd/o Late Hasan Tandon Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Padiyain Police Station and Tahsil Pathriya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.. 2 - Aditya Tandon S/o Late Hasan Tandon Aged About 3 Years Minor Through The Mother (Natural Guardian) Appellant No. 01 Smt. Rukhmani Tandon , R/o Village Padiyain Police Station and Tahsil Pathriya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. 3 - Aman Tandon S/o Late Hasan Tandon Aged About 1 Years Minor
Legal Reasoning
Through The Mother (Natural Guardian) Appellant No. 01 Smt. Rukhmani Tandon , R/o Village Padiyain Police Station and Tahsil Pathriya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Ravi Yadaw S/o Bharat Singh Yadaw Aged About 24 Years R/o Ward No. - 07, Teela - Tola , Chhatarpur , Police Station - Alipura, District Chhatarpur Madhya Pradesh. (Driver of the Vehicle Truck No. M.P. 20 / H.B. 9966). 2 - Manish Tiwari S/o Vinod Kumar Tiwari Aged About 45 Years R/o 2 Ramaji Nagar, Behind of Number - 01, Chhatarpur , Police Station Tahsil And District Chhatarpur Madhya Pradesh. (Owner Of The Vehicle Truck No. M.P. 20 / H.B. 9966). 3 - Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office - Rama Trade Centre , 2nd Floor, in front of Rajiv Plaza, Old Bus Stand , Bilaspur , Police Station - Civil Line, Tahsil and District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer of The Vehicle). 4 - Smt. Janki Bai Tandon W/o Hemraj Tandon Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Padiyain Police Station and Tahsil Pathriya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For the appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent no.1 : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent no. 3 : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 17/04/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed challenging the award dated 07th January, 2020 passed by the learned VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh in MACT No. 511/2018 and 471/2018 whereby, the learned Tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs. 14,62,300/-. 2. As per the pleadings of the claim application filed under Section 3 166 of the MV Act, the claimants are the wife, mother and children of deceased Hasan Tandon. Before the accident, deceased used to work as driver and earn Rs. 500/- per day. On the date of accident 02.05.2018, deceased was coming to his village Padiyain from Mungeli by driving his motorcycle and on the way at about 1.25 p.m. when he reached Lachchanpur turn at 1.25 pm., the driver of Truck No. MP 20/HB 9966, respondent no.1 by driving the said vehicle rashly and negligently hit the motorcycle of the deceased from front side and crushed him as a result of which deceased suffered serious injuries on his head, chest, hands and legs and eventually during the course of treatment he died in CIMS Hospital Bilaspur. The wife alongwith children of deceased have filed claim petition No.511/2018 while the mother and two brothers of deceased filed the Claim petition No.471/2018 seeking compensation of Rs.45,00,000/- and Rs. 63,34,000/- respectively. 3. The learned claims Tribunal on scrutiny of the evidence brought on record and the pleadings made in application, took the monthly income of deceased as Rs.6500/- i.e, Rs. 78,000/- per year. It further added 40% of income towards future prospects, deducted one-fourth towards personal expenses and applied multiplier of 17 and thus worked out the total dependency to be Rs.13,92,300/-. Further more, on conventional heads, a total of Rs.70,000/- has been awarded. The Tribunal has held that the appellants (wife and children) as also respondent no.4 Janki Bai, being mother are the dependents of the deceased whereas it has denied to consider the brothers of deceased 4 as dependents. Thus a total compensation of Rs. 14,62,300/- has been awarded in favour of the appellants and respondent no.4 Janki Bai Tandon (mother) being dependents of deceased with interest @ 7.5% per annum with a further direction that in case the said amount is not deposited within a month, it would carry penal interest @ 9% per anuum. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that the claimants have pleaded the income of deceased as Rs. 500/- per day i.e., 15,000/- per year but the learned Tribunal has merely taken the monthly income of deceased as Rs.6500 i.e., Rs.78,000/- thereby the Tribunal erred in not considering the proper monthly income of the deceased for determining the just compensation. He further submits that the amounts granted under the other heads are also meagre. therefore, this appeal may be allowed and amount of compensation may be enhanced suitably. 5. Learned counsel for Respondent No.3 supports the award and submits that looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has granted just compensation which needs no interference. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 7. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 8. As regards the income of deceased, the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.500/- per day by working as driver 5 but no valid evidence in support thereof has been produced, but it cannot be said that the deceased was not earning anything from his work. Therefore in absence of any reliable evidence regarding income of deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, minimum wage rate structure prevailing on the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc., especially the notification issued by the State through Labour Department for minimum wages, I find it appropriate to take minimum wages of deceased as Rs.8632/- per month as fixed by the State at the relevant time of accident i.e., 02.05.2018. Thus the annual incomes comes to Rs.1,03,584/- per annum (8632 x 12). So far as future prospects is concerned, in view of decision of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 40% towards future prospects i.e.,41,434/- the annual income would come to Rs.1,45,018/- (Rs.1,03,584 plus 41,434). 9. The deceased was aged about 26 years and the claimants, wife two children and mother (respondent no.4 Janki Bai) are dependents of the deceased (total 4) so the deduction towards personal expenses would be one-fourth (1/4) i.e., Rs 36,254/- and after deducting 1/4th, the annual dependency would come to Rs.1,08,764/- (1,45,018 minus 36,254). In view of the decisions of the Hon’ble Suprme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC l2l and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 considering the age of deceased, after applying the multiplier 17, the total loss of dependency is worked out to Rs.18,48,988/- (1,08,764 x 6 17). Under the other heads, the claimants are further entitled to get Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and as per Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, AIR Online 2018 SC, each dependent/claimant is entitled to get Rs.40,000/- for loss of love and affection. In this case, there are 4 dependents, therefore, this Court is computing the compensation total compensation in the following manner : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Total yearly income (Annual income 1,03,584 + Future prospects 41,434/-) Rs.1,45,018/- (-) Personal expenses 1/4th Annual loss of dependency Total loss of dependency or total loss of income by applying the multiplier 17 (1,08,764 x 17) Rs. 36,254/- Rs. 1,08,764/- Rs.18,48,988/- Loss of love and affection (40000 x 4) 1,60,000 Loss of estate Funeral expenses Total compensation 15,000 15,000/- 20,38,988/- 10. Thus the total compensation is recomputed to Rs.20,38,988/- from which after deduction of Rs. 14,62,300/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs.5,76,688/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of enhancement of the award till its realisation. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 11.
Decision
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award 7 stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 12. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the amount awarded by the Tribunal. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of para-legal workers may be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area where the claimants reside. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao