1. Anita Devi, wife of Late Rajendra Kumar Sahu 2. Simran Kumari, daughter of v. 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2
Case Details
-1- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No. 248 of 2016 1. Anita Devi, wife of Late Rajendra Kumar Sahu 2. Simran Kumari, daughter of Late Rajendra Kumar Sahu 3. Sanjiv Kumari, daughter of Late Rajendra Kumar Sahu 4. Ritik Kumar, son of Late Rajendra Kumar Sahu 5. Shanti Devi, wife of Sri Balram Sahu ..... … Appellants Versus 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh .... … Respondents with M.A. No. 249 of 2016 1. Veena Devi, wife of Late Janak Keshri 2. Kriti Kumar, daughter of Late Janak Keshri 3. Priti Kumar, daughter of Late Janak Keshri 4. Niti Kumari, daughter of Late Janak Keshri 5. Viwek Kumar, son of Late Janak Keshri Versus ..... … Appellants 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh .... … Respondents with M.A. No. 250 of 2016 1. Sitapati Devi, wife of Late Shyam Krishna Prasad Jaiswal 2. Arun Kumar Jaiswal, son of Late Shyam Krishna Prasad Jaiwal Versus ..... … Appellants 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh with M.A. No. 251 of 2016
Legal Reasoning
1. Ramnath Sahu, son of Late Mohan Sahu 2. Ropani Devi, wife of Sri Ramnath Sahu Versus ..... … Appellants 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh .... … Respondents with M.A. No. 254 of 2016 1. Ram Lakhan Gope, son of Sri Fakir Gope 2. Tetri Devi, wife of Sri Ram Lakhan Gope ..... … Appellants Versus 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh .... … Respondents with M.A. No. 255 of 2016 -2- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases 1. Ramdhari Singh, son of Late Laxmi Nath Singh 2. Gita Devi, wife of Ramdhari Singh ..... … Appellants Versus 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh .... … Respondents with M.A. No. 256 of 2016 1. Sunita Devi, wife of Late Manoj Sahu 2. Ansu Kumari, daughter of Late Manoj Sahu 3. Sawjalumari, daughter of Late Manoj Sahu 4. Kajal Kumari, daughter of Late Manoj Sahu 5. Sacham Kumar, son of Late Siva Sahu 6. Malti Devi, wife of Late Siva Sahu Versus ..... … Appellants 1. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguli Road, Main Road, Ranchi. 2. Raj Kumar Singh, son of Late Radha Govind Singh -------- .... … Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ : For the Appellants For the Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate. Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate. ------ 15/ 14.02.2023 Heard Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in all the cases and Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1-insurance company in all cases. In spite of the valid service of notice, the respondent No. 2 in all these cases have chosen not to appear in these matters. 2. All these appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 31.03.2014, passed by the learned Presiding Officer P.O. M.A.C.T., Ranchi, in Compensation Case Nos. 141 of 2009, 127 of 2009, 129 of 2009, 126 of 2009, 128 of 2009, 125 of 2009 and 140 of 2009 and that’s why all the cases have been heard together with the consent of the parties. 3. In Compensation Case No. 141 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 248 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,29,500/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 127 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 249 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,29,500/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 129 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 250 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,83,000/- -3- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 126 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 251 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,61,000/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 128 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 254 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,61,000/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 125 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 255 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,61,000/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 140 of 2009 [in M.A. No. 256 of 2016], the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,19,200/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of settlement of issue till the date of realization. In Compensation Case No. 125 of 2009, Compensation Case No. 126 of 2009 and Compensation Case No. 128 of 2009, the claimants are parents of the respective deceased and they have prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs. 4.30 lacs each along with 11% per annum interest. In compensation Case No. 127 of 2009, the claimants are the wife, daughter, sons and father of the deceased and they have prayed for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 5.80 lacs along with interest @ 11% per annum. In Compensation Case No. 129 of 2009, the claimants are mother and brother of the decased and they have prayed for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 4.30 lacs along with interest @ 11% per annum. In Compensation Case No. 140 of 2009, the claimants are the wife, children and parents of the deceased and they have prayed for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 9.30 lacs along with interest @ 11% per annum. In Compensation Case No. 141 of 2009, the claimants are the wife, children and parents of the deceased and they have also prayed for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 9.30 lacs along with -4- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases interest @ 11% per annum. 4. In all these appeals, the claimants have filed the compensation cases, alleging therein that on 28.04.2009 at about 2.00 A.M., the deceased namely Chandan Kumar Singh, Satyendra Kumar Sahu, Janak Keshari, Arjun Gope, Awadesh Kumar Jaiswal, Rajendra Kumar Sahu @ Raju and Manoj Sahu were travelling in a commercial jeep, bearing registration No. JH-07-C-4027 and in that connection when the said jeep reached near village-Jura within Bharno P.S., then due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said vehicle, became unbalanced and consequently it dashed to the tree situated in the left side of the road, causing fatal injuries to the aforesaid deceased persons. 5. In Compensation Case No. 125 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was unmarried and he was doing service in private school and his monthly income was Rs. 4,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 126 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was unmarried and he was doing the work of supervisor and his monthly income was Rs. 4,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 127 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was a business man and his monthly income was Rs. 5,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 128 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was doing a labour work and from such work, he was earning Rs. 4,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 129 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was unmarried and from the business, the deceased was earning Rs. 4,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 140 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was doing the contract work and from such work he has earned Rs. 7,000/- per month. In Compensation Case No. 141 of 2009, it was alleged that the deceased was doing the contract work and from such work he has earned Rs. 7,000/- per month. 6. On contest, the learned tribunal has passed the award by a common judgment dated 31.03.2014 in the aforementioned compensation cases. 7. Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in all these cases submits that the learned tribunal has not assessed the income of the deceased in all cases in the right direction. He submits that under the conventional head, only Rs. 20,000/- has been provided by the learned tribunal in all the cases, however, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Versus Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in -5- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases (2017) 16 SCC 680, the said head is also required to be enhanced. 8. On the other hand Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-insurance company in all the cases submits that the learned tribunal has rightly calculated the amount and there is no illegality in the said award. He submits that so far as the insurance company is concerned, award has already been satisfied in all the cases, which has been accepted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. 9. In view of the above facts and submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the court has gone through the judgment of the learned tribunal, from which, it transpires that the learned tribunal has fixed the income of all the deceased to the tune of Rs. 2,500/- in all the cases, whereas at least on the point of taking into consideration the Minimum Wages Act, it was required to be enhanced, however, the same has not been rightly fixed. 10. In view of the Pranay Sethi’s Case (Supra), the conventional head is modified to the tune of Rs. 70,000/- in place of the awarded amount under the said head in all the cases. 11. In the cases wherein the claimants have claimed the income of Rs. 4,000/-, the same shall be considered at Rs. 4,000/- for the calculation purpose and in the cases, where the claimants have claimed the income of Rs. 5000/- and odd, the income will be considered at Rs. 5,000/- per month. 12. For correct appreciation of modification, the tabular chart is produced hereinbelow:- In M.A. No. 248 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 141 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 4,29,500/- Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 8,57,500 – Rs. 4,29,500= Rs. 4,28,500/- The difference amount of Rs. 4,28,500/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 5,000/- 42 14 25% 1/4th Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 8,57,500/- In M.A. No. 249 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 127 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 4,29,500/- Sl. No. Particulars 1. Income Amount Rs. 5,000/- -6- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 8,57,500 – Rs. 4,29,500 = Rs. 4,28,500/- The difference amount of Rs. 4,28,500/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) 42 14 25% 1/4th Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 8,57,500/- In M.A. No. 250 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 129 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 2,83,000/- Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 4,90,000 – Rs. 2,83,000 = Rs. 2,07,000/- The difference amount of Rs. 2,07,000/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 4,000/- 45 14 25% 1/2 (50%) Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 4,90,000/- In M.A. No. 251 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 126 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 3,61,000/- Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 6,74,800 – Rs. 3,61,000= Rs. 3,13,800/- The difference amount of Rs. 3,13,800/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 4,000/- 24 18 40% 1/2 (50%) Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 6,74,800/- In M.A. No. 254 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 128 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 3,61,000/- Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 6,74,800 – Rs. 3,61,000= Rs. 3,13,800/- The difference amount of Rs. 3,13,800/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 4,000/- 20 18 40% 1/2 (50%) Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 6,74,800/- In M.A. No. 255 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 125 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 3,61,000/- -7- M.A. No. 248 of 2016 and analogous cases Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 6,74,800 – Rs. 3,61,000= Rs. 3,13,800/- The difference amount of Rs. 3,13,800/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 4,000/- 18 18 40% 1/2 (50%) Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 6,74,800/- In M.A. No. 256 of 2016 [Compensation Case No. 140 of 2009]:- Compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is Rs. 5,19,200/- Income Age Multiplier Future Prospects Deduction towards personal expenses Conventional Head Total Income Sl. No. Particulars 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Difference Amount- Rs. 11,45,200– Rs. 5,19,200= Rs. 6,26,000/- The difference amount of Rs. 6,26,000/- shall also carry the interest @ 6% per annum from 03.10.2012 (date of settlement of issues) Amount Rs. 5,000/- 32 16 40% 1/5th Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 11,45,200/- 13. The award dated 31.03.2014 of the learned tribunal is modified in the above terms. 14. The order of right of recovery passed in favour of the insurance company by the learned tribunal has not been interfered by this court. 15. The interest awarded by the learned tribunal will also carry the difference of the amount to be paid by the insurance company in light of the modification made today. 16. The difference of amount in each cases shall be paid by the insurance company within six weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. 17. These appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Amitesh/- (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)