Judgment · High Court

Mr. T. Halam, Advocate. Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, Advocate. Mr. K. De, Advocate. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD

04.04.2024 ORDER This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation against the Judgment and Award dated 29.05.2023 passed by Ld. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, West Tripura, Agartala in Case No.T.S(MAC) 123 of 2020. [2] The succinct fact of the case of the claimant petitioners as depicted in the claim petition is that on 16.07.2020 in between 7.30 to 8.30 p.m. the victim Manik Debbarma along with one Ashit Debbarma was going to the market from his house on foot through the rear side of the road and when he reached near Burning Ghat at College Chowmuhani, at that time, one Tata Magic bearing registration No. TR-01-D-2155 coming with excessive speed in a rash and negligent manner suddenly dashed on the back side of the victim Manik Debbarma. As a result, the victim fell down on the road and sustained bleeding injuries on his head, chest, spinal-cord, hip joint and other parts of his body.

After the accident, the local people along with Ashit Debbarma shifted the injured victim to the Jirania Hospital but due to his serious injuries, he was referred to the GBP Hospital wherein he got admitted as an indoor patient but ultimately, he succumbed to his injuries on 19.07.2020 in course of his treatment and thereby the claimant petitioners spent Rs.2,25,000/- for the treatment of the victim for such injuries. Thereafter, post mortem examination was done over the dead body. Concerning the said accident a police case was registered at Jirania Police Station vide Jirania P.S. Case No.35 of 2020 under Sections 279/304(A) of I.P.C. and Sections 183/184 of M.V. Act. It is stated in the claim petition that the victim Manik Debbarma was aged about 53 years at the time of death and he was a Group 'C' government employee serving under the TSECL having a monthly salary of Rs.60,000/-. Finally, the claimant petitioners claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.80,00,000/- in total. [3] By the order dated 29.05.2023 the learned court below has observed in the following manner: It is therefore held that the claimant petitioners are entitled to get compensation of Rs.41,50,700/- (Rupees Forty one Lakh Fifty Thousand Seven Hundred only) with interest @ 7% per annum with effect from 10.09.2020 i.e. the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

The opposite party No.2 Shiram General Insurance Company Ltd. will pay the amount of compensation with interest within 30 days from today in terms of Section 168(3) of MV Act 1988. Out of the awarded amount of compensation inclusive of interest, the claimant petitioner No.1 will get 60% and the claimant petitioner No.2 will get 40%. Out of the respective share of claimant petitioners no.1 and 2, 50% each of their share shall be kept in fixed deposit scheme in their respective name in any Nationalized Bank of their locality for a period of five years each and the remaining 50% of their respective share be paid to them through their respective bank account. The claimant petitioners no.1 and 2 shall however be at liberty to withdraw monthly interest from their deposit to meet their day to day expenses. No loan or withdrawal shall be permitted from/against any of the fixed deposit certificates without prior permission of this Tribunal. [4] It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the assessment of multiplier 9 of the age group of 51-55 is in violation of the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarala Verma & Ors V. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC

According to the counsel for the appellant, the Ld. Tribunal has miserably failed to appreciate that the deceased did not reach the age group of 56-60 years as on the date of the accident so as to attract the multiplier 9 in view of Sarala Verma (supra). [5] On perusal of the record, it appears to this court that the Ld. Tribunal considering the date of birth of the deceased as 06.05.1965 had made a calculation with regard to finding out the age of the deceased at the time of his death. According to Ld. Tribunal the age of the deceased at the time of his death was 55 years 2 months and 14 days. Following this, the principle as was laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarala Verma & Ors (supra) was applied which according to this Court is just and proper and needs no interference from this Court. [6] In view of the above, it is clear that the appellant herein has failed to make out his case and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present appeal for enhancement of compensation stands dismissed confirming the Judgment and Award dated 29.05.2023 passed by Ld. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, West Tripura, Agartala in Case No.T.S(MAC) 123 of 2020. As a sequel, stay, if any, stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any, also stands closed. JUDGE Dipak DIPAK DAS DIPAK DAS 16:13:31 +05'30'