Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 269 of 2021 1 - Santosh Kumar Patel S/o Butiram Patel Aged About 42 Years (Father) Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chandankunwar W/o Santosh Kumar Patel Aged About 35 Years (Mother) Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., Gujarat 3 - Ku. Priyanka Patel D/o Santosh Kumar Patel Aged About 16 Years (Sister) Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Chandankunwar, W/o Santosh Kumar Patel, Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ku. Janki Patel D/o Santosh Kumar Patel Aged About 13 Years (Sister) Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Chandankunwar, W/o Santosh Kumar Patel, Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 5 - Premanand Patel S/o Santosh Kumar Patel Aged About 10 Years (Brother) Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Chandankunwar, W/o Santosh Kumar Patel, Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 6 - Ku. Manju Patel D/o Santosh Kumar Patel Aged About 6 Years (Sister) Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Chandankunwar, W/o Santosh Kumar Patel, Caste Patel, R/o Songudha, Tahsil Sakti Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Shyam Kumar Patel S/o Kusuram Patel Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Jagdalla, Tahsil And Police Station Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. (Driver And Owner) 2 - Branch Manager Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Icici Lombard House 414 Veer Savarkar Marg Near Sidhi Vinayak Temple Prabhadevi Mumbai 400025 Chhattisgarh, (Insurance Company) ... Respondent(s) 2 For Appellant For Respondent No. 1 For Respondent No. 2
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. K. K. Dewangan, Advocate : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate : Mr. Sourabh Sharma and Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocates Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 02/09/2025 Heard on IA No. 01 – application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963. 2. Though opposed but for the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal barred by 461 days is hereby condoned. 3. With the consent of the parties heard finally. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV Act) challenging the award dated 04.10.2018 passed in Claim Case No. 74/2017 passed by the 1 st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, CG. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs. 32,00,000/-, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 6,18,515/- on account of death of deceased Anju Patel in an accident that took place on 17.08.2017 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 11 AF 1189 driven and owned by the respondent No. 1 / driver and owner and insured with respondent No. 2 / insurance company. 4. As per the pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was aged about 18 years, and was earning Rs. 7000/- per month by working as a labour. 5. The claim application was resisted by the respondents on various grounds and denied the averments of the claim application and respondent No. 2 / insurance company pleaded that there is violations of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The learned Tribunal framed issues on the basis of the pleadings and decided the same in favour of the claimant and awarded the above stated compensation. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the date of accident is 17.08.2017 and the learned Tribunal has only considered the monthly income of the deceased to Rs. 4500/- per month. He further submits that the monthly income of the deceased may be taken at least Rs. 6000/- per month. 3 7. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submissions and submits that the deceased was only aged about 18 years she was a girl and in due course of time she would have married therefore, there is no dependency of the appellants/claimants on the income of the deceased, therefore, the finding of learned Tribunal may not be disturbed. 8. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. Taking into consideration the submissions and also evidence on record, age of the deceased; minimum wages; to make the compensation just, this Court is inclined to take the monthly income of the deceased to Rs. 6000/- per month. In light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Smt. Sarla Verma and others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130 this Court computes the compensation in the following manner:- S. No. Description Monthly income 40% Future prospect Total Monthly Income (6000+2400) Total Yearly Income (8400x12) 1/2 Deduction for personal expenses of deceased Net income Amount 6000/- 2400/- 8400/- 100800/- 50400/- 50400/- Multiplier of 18 applied to assess total loss of dependency 907200/- Funeral Expenses Loss of estate Medical Expenses Parental and filial consortium (A- & A-2) Total compensation 15,000/- 15,000/- 22515/- 80,000/-(Rs. 40000/- each) 1039715/- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 10. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 6,18,515/- awarded by learned tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 1,039,715/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 6,18,515/-, the claimants are 4 held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 4,21,200/-. The additional amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of this order. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 11. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation within 60 days. After deposit Rs. 2,00,000/- (each) shall be invested as fixed deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of one years in the name of appellant Nos. 1 and 2. Remaining amount shall be paid to appellant No. 2 through bank transaction/account payee cheque. 12. No cost. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan