Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Jamshedpur, through its Deputy Manager Prafull Choudhary v. 1
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No. 713 of 2018 Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Jamshedpur, through its Deputy Manager Prafull Choudhary ..... … Appellant Versus 1. Smt. Indiya Devi 2. Dinesh Mandal 3. Mohan Mandl 4. Smt. Bisheshwari Devi 5. Vikram Yadav 6. Lalu Yadav with M.A No. 728 of 2018 1. Smt. Indiya Devi 2. Dinesh Mandal 3. Mohan Mandal (Mandl) Versus ..... … Respondents ..... … Appellants 1. Vikram Yadav 2. Lalu Yadav 3. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, Jamshedpur Branch ..... … Respondents. --------
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Appellant Insurance Company : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate. For the Claimants : Mr. Shiwam Lath, A.C. to Mr. A.K. Lall, Advocate. ------ 06/ 20.06.2024 Heard Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company and Mr. Shiwam Lath, learned A.C. to Mr. A.K. Lall, appearing for the claimants. 2. Both these appeals have been filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award dated 29.08.2018, passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Court No. 1, Giridih in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 33 of 2014. 3. It appears that the right of recovery is there to the Insurance Company, as the finding is there in favour of the insurance company with regard to the driving license and the respondent Nos. 5 and 6, who are owner and driver respectively in M.A. No. 713 of 2018 and further they have not filed any appeal and they were not noticed by the co- ordinate bench. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants has appeared -1- for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in M.A. No. 713 of 2018. 5. The claimants have filed M.A. No. 728 of 2018 for enhancement of the awarded amount. 6. The prayer in M.A. No. 713 of 2018 is made to exonerate the appellant-insurance company from paying the awarded amount. 7. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company in M.A. No. 713 of 2018 submits that the claimants instituted the claim case before the learned Tribunal asserting therein that on 12.01.2014 in the evening, the deceased Chetlal Mandal was going on bicycle from D.A.V. School, Sirsiya to the field of his friend Jagdish Verma after completing his duty when he reached at about 300 meters away from Mahadaiya More, by the side of the road, near forest office quarter, Bengabad, at the same time a Tempo bearing registration No. JH-11-G-7512 coming towards Bengabad and going towards Giridih driving rashly and negligently by its driver dashed and collided in front portion of the bicycle causing grievous injuries to said Chetlal Mandal and also damaging his bicycle. He was immediately brought to the Sadar Hospital, Giridih by a tempo by help of people of the locality, where after first-aid, he was referred to Dhanbad for better treatment and when he was going to Dhanbad by ambulance, he died in the way. On these backgrounds, the compensation case has been filed claiming the compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,00,000/-. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs. 18,93,000/- with simple interest @ 9% per annum till realization of the amount. He further submits that it has further been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as funeral expenses, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 40,000/- for the loss of consortium without interest. He submits that the learned Tribunal has held the point of -2- driving license in favour of the insurance company, in spite of that the award has been awarded and liability has been fastened upon the insurance company, which is not in accordance with law. He further submits that the learned Tribunal has further erred in taking the income of the deceased to the tune of Rs. 14,000/- per months. He submits that there cannot be any head towards loss of love and affection and the interest instead of 7.5% has been allowed as @ 9% per annum, which is required to be interfered by this court. On these grounds, he submits that the appeal of the insurance company may kindly be allowed. 9. Mr. Shiwam Lath, learned counsel appearing for the claimants has opposed the prayer on the ground that the learned Tribunal has rightly held that the right of recovery has been made in favour of the insurance company from the owner of the vehicle in question, as such, there is no illegality in the award and this appeal may kindly be dismissed. 10. Mr. Lath, learned counsel appearing for the appellants- claimants in M.A. No. 728 of 2018 submits that the said petition has been filed for enhancement of the award, as in the head of consortium, which was required to be granted in favour of the each of the claimants. He submits that the award is further may kindly be modified with respect to deduction of 1/3rd, as the same is not in accordance with law, as it should be 1/4th. On these grounds, he submits that the award may kindly be modified. 11. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company in M.A. No. 728 of 2018 submits that so far as the consortium part is concerned, it cannot be beyond the ratio of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Versus Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. He further submits that the said Pranay Sethi’s judgment is a Constitutional Bench judgment, in view of that, the same is still -3- holding the field and with regard to consortium for each of the claimants, the other cases are pending and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has granted the stay in some of the cases, being Civil Appeal Nos. 2410-2412 of 2023 [Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Bhagat Singh Rawat & Ors.]. It was held by the High Court that Rs. 50,000/- is required to be paid to all of the claimants, which was overturned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He submits that 1/3rd is the correct deduction. 12. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties and looking into the contents of the findings of the learned Tribunal, it transpires that the learned Tribunal has held that the driver was not having the valid license, in view of that the insurance company was directed to satisfy the award and recovered the same from the owner of the vehicle in question. The court is not accepting the argument of Mr. Ashutosh Anand with regard to the monthly income of the deceased, as he was driving the school bus and as per the LPC, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion of the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 14,000/- and there is no illegality in the said finding, as such, that argument is negated by this court. So far as the argument with regard to interest in concerned, that is required to be interfered with in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharampal & Ors. Versus U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, reported in (2008) 12 SCC 208, the interest should be @7.5%, whereas the learned Tribunal has awarded the interest @ 9%. 13.
Decision
In view of the above, the interest part is modified @ 7.5% per annum in place of interest @ 9% per annum. 14. So far as the M.A. 728 of 2018 is concerned, which is meant for enhancement of the award by the claimants, considering the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra) and further one of the case, as relied by -4- the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company, Rs. 50,000/- allowed in favour of the each of the claimants is not acceptable. 15. In view of that, the consortium, as claimed by the claimants for enhancement is not accepted. However, the court find force in the argument of learned counsel appearing for the claimants that the deduction should be 1/4th in light of the Pranay Sethi’s Case (Supra). As such, the said part is required to be modified. 16. As such, the interest part is modified to @ 7.5% per annum in place of interest @ 9% per annum and the deduction is modified to 1/4th in place of 1/3rd. 17. The Award dated 29.08.2018, passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Court No. 1, Giridih in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 33 of 2014 is modified to the above extent. 18. 19. Both these appeals are disposed of in above terms. The statutory amount deposited in M.A. No. 713 of 2018 shall be transmitted back to the learned Tribunal, which will be utilized in satisfying the award. The insurance company shall satisfy the award within eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of the copy of this order. Amitesh/- (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) -5-