Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.04.03 16:36:01 +0530 2025:CGHC:15522 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 10 of 2019 1. Smt. Rismuniya Paikra W/o Late Balram Paikra Aged About 38 Years R/o Village - Batouli Patelpara P.S. And Tahsil - Batouli District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 2. Pramod Kumar Paikra S/o Late Balram Paikra Aged About 18 Years (Minor) Through The Natural Gaurdian Mother Appellant No. 1 Smt. Rismuniya, W/o Late Balram Paikra, R/o Village - Batouli Patelpara P.S. And Tahsil - Batouli District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 3. Shivshanker Paikra S/o Late Balram Paikra Aged About 15 Years (Minor) Through The Natural Gaurdian Mother
Legal Reasoning
Appellant No. 1 Smt. Rismuniya, W/o Late Balram Paikra, R/o Village - Batouli Patelpara P.S. And Tahsil - Batouli District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1. Pardeshi Banjara S/o Karamram Banjara Aged About 34 Years R/o Village And Post - Kotaba P.S. Bagbahara, Tahsil Pathalgaon District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. (Driver) 2. Devnarayan Sahu S/o Lalmuni Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post - Kotaba, P.S. Bagbahara, Tahsil - Pathalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. (Owner) 3. Branch Manager The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Rahul Complex 3rd Floor O.P. Jindal Road Jagatpur, P.S. And Tahsil - Raigarh District Raigarh 2 Division Office Near Ambedkar Chowk Manendragarh Road Ambikapur Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil - Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Insurer) ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Akansha Vishwakarma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 For other Respondents : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate. : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. Order on Board ( 02 .0 4 .202 5 ) 1. This appeal arises out of the impugned award dated 27.08.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) in M.A. Claim Case No. 65/2018 awarding a compensation of Rs. 6,56,874/- with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of application, in favour of the appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss. 2. The averment in the claim petition, in brief, is that on 01.01.2018 at about 7.00 pm, when Balram Paikra (now deceased) was returning from Village Boda to his house by the motorcycle and when he reached near Bilaspur river turning, respondent No. 1 was driving the Pickup Bolero in a rash and negligently manner and dashed in the motorcycle, due to which Balram Paikra (deceased) suffered grievous injuries and died on 06.01.2018 while undergoing treatment at B.R. Ambedkar Hospital Raipur. After that, a report was lodged based on the above stated offence. It is 3 stated that on the date of the incident, the age of the deceased was 40 years who was working as a Mason (Rajmistri) and was earning Rs. 11,000/- per month from his work. Due to the casual death of the husband, father of the appellants/claimants, there is an irreparable loss to the appellants. Therefore, the appellants preferred an application to claim a total compensation of Rs. 24,50,000/- for their irreparable loss. 3. The learned Claims Tribunal based on the pleadings of the parties, framed issues and, after appreciation of evidence and material available on record, the income of the deceased was taken as Rs.4000/- per month in absence of appropriate proof. Further, the age of the deceased was considered as 45 years at the time of the accident and applied 25% future prospects to the income of the deceased. Learned Tribunal found that claimants are wife and children, so deduction towards personal and caring expenses would be 1/3, and after applying a multiplier of 14, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 5,60,000/- and Rs.70,000/- has been awarding on other heads and Rs.26,874/- towards medical expenses. Thus, total compensation of Rs. 6,56,874/- with interest @ 7% per annum, in favour of the appellants/claimants. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claimants have pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs.11,000/- per month but the learned Claims Tribunal has only assessed notional income as Rs. 4,000/- per month which is on the lower side. Learned counsel for appellants also submits that the Tribunal has awarded lesser compensation under other heads which also needs to 4 be enhanced suitably. Therefore, this appeal may be allowed. 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 Learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. 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. 8. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.6,56,874/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 9. As regards income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.11,000/- per month from the work of Mason (Rajmistri) but no appropriate documentary evidence in support thereof has been adduced, but it cannot be said that the deceased was not earning anything from his work. Therefore, evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc., I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 8,450/- per month. The annual income of the deceased comes to Rs. 1,01,400/- per annum. As per 5 National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 25% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 25,350/- as has rightly held by the Tribunal, the annual income of the deceased comes to Rs. 1,26,750/-. 10. The deceased was aged about 45 years and was married and the claimants are the wife and children of the deceased so deduction towards personal and caring expenses would be 1/3 i.e., 42,250/-, as has rightly held by the Tribunal, the annual dependency comes to Rs. 84,500/-. 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 considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 14, as has rightly held by the Claims Tribunal, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 11,83,000/-. The claimants are further entitled for loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-, for funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- and as per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for loss of love and affection Rs. 40,000/- each i.e. Rs.1,20,000/- and Rs.26,874 towards the medical expenses, as has rightly held by the Claims tribunal. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 13,59,874/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following manner:- S.No. Heads Calculation 01 Compensation towards Rs. 11,83,000/- dependency 02 Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 6 03 Towards Love and affection to Rs. 1,20,000/- all the two claimants @ Rs. 40,000/- 04 Funeral Expenses 05 Medical Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 26,874/- Total compensation Rs. 13,59,874/- Awarded 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 13,59,874/-. After deducting Rs. 6,56,874/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 7,03,000/-. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 7,03,000/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. It is made clear that the remaining amount of award shall be paid by the insurance company. 13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co- ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.