Nafr High Court
Case Details
Digitally signed by RAMAKANT NIRALA 1 2025:CGHC:21730 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No.928 of 2018 Judgment reserved on : 05.03.2025 Judgment delivered on : 09.05.2025 1 - Kanhai Kashyap, S/o Sampat Kashyap Aged About 52 Years 2 - Smt. Ghevshila W/o Kanhai Kashyap, Aged About 48 Years 3 - Miss Sheetal Kashyap, W/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap, Aged About 14 Years 4 - Master Lalit Kashyap, W/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap, Aged About 7 Years 5 - Master Santosh Kashyap, W/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap, Aged About 3 Years Appellant Nos.3 to 5 are minor therefore represented through Natural Guardian Kanhai Kashyap (Grandfather) All R/o Village Duganpal, P. S. Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh versus Appellants 1 - Rohit Gawade Late Dhurwo Gawade, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Gudarapara Village Raikot, P. S. Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Vehicle) 2 - Narsingh Gawade, W/o Chaitu Gawade, Aged About 25 Years R/o Gudrapara, Village Raikot, P. S. - Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle) 2 3 - The Bajaj General Insurance Co. Ltd. Pandari Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) MAC No.929 of 2018 1 - Miss Sheetal Kashyap D/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap Aged About 14 Years 2 - Master Lalit Kashyap, S/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap, Aged About 7 Years 3 - Master Santosh Kashyap S/o Late Kanwal Singh Kashyap Aged About 3 Years Appellants are minor therefore represented Through Natural Guardian Kanhai Kashyap (Grandfather) S/o Sampat Kashyap Aged About 52 Years All R/o Village Duganpal P.S. Kodenar District Bastar Chhattisgarh Appellants Versus 1 - Rohit Gawade S/o Late Dhurwo Gawade Aged About 22 Years R/o Gudarapara Village Raikot P.S. Kodenar District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle) 2 - Narsingh Gawade S/o Chaitu Gawade Aged About 25 Years R/o Gudrapara Village Raikot P.S. Kodenar District Bastar Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle) 3 - The Bajaj General Insurance Co. Ltd, Pandari Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) For Appellants :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. P. K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate 3 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey C A V Judgment 1. Since both these appeals arise out of common award and claim case number, therefore, the same are heard together and are being decided by a common order. 2. Both the appeals have been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation awarded in their favour by the learned Claims Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that On the date of incident i.e. 01.09.2014 while the deceased late Kanwal Singh Kashyap was going to his home by bicycle with his wife i.e. late Smt. Lakhwati Kashyap at that time the offending vehicle pickup driven by the respondent no.1 in rash and negligence manner dashed the bicycle of the deceased, as such the deceased sustained severe injuries and died during treatment. Thereafter a criminal case was registered against the respondent No.1. Subsequently, the claimants filed claim case before the learned Tribunal, which have been partly allowed, against which the present appeals have been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the award amount. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Claims Tribunal has failed to appreciate the testimony of the appellants’ witnesses. The learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.4500/- per month 4 instead of Rs.15,000/- (deceased husband) and Rs.10,000/- (deceased wife), as deceased husband was doing the work of skilled labour as mason and he was getting Rs.15,000/- per month, whereas the deceased wife was doing the work of vegetable selling and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Similarly on other heads also, less amount has been awarded by the learned Tribunal. The learned Claims Tribunal has also not considered the future prospect of the deceased income and wrongly multiplier has been applied. Therefore, the appeals deserve to be allowed and the amount be enhanced suitably. Reliance has been placed on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, Rajesh and others versus Rajbir Singh and Others, reported in (2013) 9 S.C.C. 54. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent insurance company supports the impugned award and submits that the learned Tribunal has minutely appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and awarded the compensation in favour of the claimants, which is just and proper and needs no enhancement. Therefore, the appeals are without any merit and are liable to be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. It is clear from the record of the learned Tribunal that the learned 5 Tribunal found that on the date of incident on 01.09.2014, the respondent No.1 driving the vehicle Mahindra Magic bearing No.CG17-KG-0383 in rash and negligent manner dashed the bicycle of the deceased, due to which the deceased Kanwal Kashyap and Smt. Lakhwati Kashyap died. The respondents did not file any cross appeal against these findings of the learned Tribunal, as such this Court has to examine whether the claim awarded by the learned Tribunal in various heads is adequate or not. 8. It is clear that the incident took place in the year 2014 and the learned Tribunal calculated the income of both the deceased as Rs.4500/- at the time of accident as per guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma (supra), but the minimum wages prescribed for unskilled labour by the Government in the year 2014 was Rs.5468/- per month, as such the income of both the deceased should have been calculated as Rs.5468/- per month. As per documents, deceased Kanwal Kashyap was aged about 38 years at the time of accident, as such the multiplier of 16 has rightly been applied by the learned Tribunal as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Sarla Verma (supra) and looking to the dependency of the deceased Kanwal, deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses has rightly been applied. Likewise, multiplier of 17 has 6 also been rightly applied in case of deceased Lakhwati Kashyap and looking to the dependency of the deceased Lakhwati, deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses has rightly been applied, but the learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount as future prospect and also not properly awarded any amount on the head of consortium in both the appeals, thus the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal needs to be enhanced in the following manner:- MAC No.928/2018 Sr. Head Amount awarded by the Amount awarded by this No. 1. Loss Tribunal (Rs.4500x12=54,000/-), of Court (Rs.5468x12=65,616), After income After deduction of 1/4th deduction of 1/4th of the of the same, the total is same, the total is Rs.40,500/- and after Rs.49,212/- and after applying multiplier of 16, applying multiplier of 16, total is Rs.6,48,000/- total is Rs.7,87,392/- 2. Future (Rs.40500x16) Nil (Rs.49,212x16) Rs.3,14,957/- Prospect Loss of Rs.2,50,000/- 3. Rs.2,50,000/- love and affection 4. Loss of Rs.20,000/- Rs.50,000/- consortium 5. Funeral Rs.20000/- Rs.15,000/- Expenses 6. Total Rs.9,38,000/- Rs.14,17,349/- Thus, the claimants/appellants in MAC No.928/2018 are 7 entitled to total compensation of Rs.14,17,349/-, but since the claimants/appellants have already been awarded Rs.9,38,000, thus they are now entitled to Rs.4,79,349/- (Rs.14,17,349 - 9,38,000) after deduction, which shall be paid by the insurance company with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the learned Tribunal to till its actual realization. MAC No.929/2018 Sr. Head Amount awarded by the Amount awarded by this No. 1. Loss Tribunal (Rs.4500x12=54000/-), of Court (5468x12=65616), After income After deduction of 1/3rd deduction of 1/3rd of the of the same, the total is same, the total is Rs.36,000/- and after Rs.43,744/-and after applying multiplier of 17, applying multiplier of 17, total is Rs.6,12,000/- total is Rs.7,43,648/- (Rs.36000x17) Nil (Rs.43,744x17) Rs.2,97,459/- 2. Future Prospect 3. Medical Rs.120,000/- Rs.120,000/- Expenses 4. Loss of Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.2,50,000/- love and affection 5. Loss of Rs.20,000/- Rs.50,000/- estate 6. Funeral Rs.20000/- Rs.15,000/- Expenses 7. Total Rs.9,22,000/- Rs.14,76,107/- Thus, the claimants/appellants in MAC No.929/2018 are 8 entitled to total compensation of Rs.14,76,107/-, but since the claimants/appellants have already been awarded Rs.9,22,000, thus they are now entitled to Rs.5,54,107/- (Rs.14,76,107 - 9,22,000) after deduction, which shall be paid by the insurance company with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the learned Tribunal to till its actual realization. 9. Accordingly, both the appeals are partly allowed. The impugned award is modified to the extent indicated herere-in-above. Sd/- Nirala Rajani Dubey Judge