Smt. Sushila & Another v. Jhadulal Bek & Ors
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1921 of 2018 1 - Smt. Sushila W/o Late Devpal Vishwakarma Aged About 53 Years Occupation House Wife R/o Village Semali Post Balrampur P.S. And Tahsil Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.............Claiment, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sukhdev S/o Late Devpal Vishwakarma, Aged About 28 Years Occupation Agriculturist And Laborer R/o Village Semali Post Balrampur P.S. And Tahsil Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.............Claiment, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Jhadulal Bek S/o Jamodip Bek Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Madanpur Post Dharampur P.S. And Tahsil Pratappur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh..............Driver, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Halimun Rashid Ansari S/o Late Yusuf Ansari Aged About 40 Years R/o Shivdhari Talab Near Godhanpur Ambikapur P.S. Gandhinagar 2 Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh...........Owner, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Branch Manager, The United India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office In Front Of Kumkum Hotal Brahman Road Ambikapur Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh...............Insurer, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 : None. & 2 For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/07/2025 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 05.09.2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surguja, District- Surguja (C.G.), in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 34/2018 (“Smt. Sushila & Another Vs. Jhadulal Bek & Ors.”) whereby an amount of Rs. 4,57,200/- with interest @ 7% per annum has been awarded in the favour of the claimants of the deceased for their 3 irreparable loss. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that on 14.11.2017, the deceased Devpal Vishwakarma was traveling to village Semali on a motorcycle, and at about 4:00 P.M., near Semali turning, the offending vehicle (Pickup) being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 collided with his motorcycle, resulting in grievous injuries to the deceased, who later succumbed to his injuries during treatment at Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur on 16.11.2017. A criminal case was registered against the driver by the concerned police station. The claimants, are the legal representatives of the deceased, filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation for his death. The respondents denied the pleadings of the appellants in their reply. After considering the evidence produced by both parties, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 4,57,200/- in favour of the appellants. Dissatisfied with the awarded amount, the appellants have filed the present appeal before this Hon’ble Court seeking enhancement of compensation. Therefore, the appellants/claimants of the deceased preferred an application claiming a total compensation of Rs. 6,88,000/-. 3. After considering the evidence and documents brought on record, the tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4 4,400/- per month i.e. Rs. 52,800/- per annum. After deduction of 1/3 of the income i.e. Rs. 17,600/- for personal expenses, the amount would be Rs. 35,200/- and considering the age of the deceased to be 55 years and the appellants/claimants are the wife and son of the deceased, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 11 and calculated the total loss of dependency as Rs. 3,87,200/-. Further Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium has been awarded. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 4,57,200/- in favour of the wife and son of the deceased with interest @ 7% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,57,200/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 5. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 3 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper 5 and requires no further enhancement. 6. None for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 10. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month from his work, but no documentary evidence in this regard has been produced by the claimants. The learned claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 4,400/- per month. Therefore, in absence of any reliable evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. especially notification by Labour Department for minimum wages. Upon considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate 6 to take income of deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month as per minimum wages, the annual income comes to Rs. 72,000/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 10% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 7,200/-, the annual income comes to Rs. 79,200/-. 11. Considering the fact that the deceased was aged about 55 years and the appellant/claimants are the wife and son of the deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/3 (Rs. 26,400/-) of the income and after deduction of the same the annual dependency comes to Rs. 52,800/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and also considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 11, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 5,80,800/-. The claimants are further entitled for Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate (increase of 10% in every three years) and Rs. 18,000/- for funeral expenses (increase of 10% in every three years). As per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for Rs. (40,000/-X2+10%+10%) each (with increase of 10% in every 7 three years) i.e. Rs. 96,000/- for consortium. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants i.e. wife and son of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 7,12,800/- in the following manner:- S.No. 01 02 Heads Calculation Towards loss of dependency Rs. 5,80,800/- Towards consortium along with Rs. 96,000/- with increase of 10% in every three years (40,000X2+10% +10%). 03 Towards loss of estate along Rs. 18,000/- with increase of 10% in every three years. 04 Towards Funeral Expenses Rs. 18,000/- along with increase of 10% in every three years. Total Rs. 7,12,800/- 12. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 7,12,800/-. After deducting Rs. 4,57,200/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 2,55,600/-. 13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants/appellants i.e. wife and son of the deceased shall be entitled for the enhanced amount of Rs. 2,55,600/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of 8 the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact.
Decision
14. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat