Ruma Mondal & Anr. v. The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Mr. Sanjay Paul, learned advocate respondent No. 1-insurance company submits that since the appellants-claimants did not produce the salary slip showing deduction on different heads, hence the learned tribunal was justified in taking into account the net income of the deceased. In light of the aforesaid submissions he opposes the prayer for enhancement. By order dated 25th July, 2022 service of notice of appeal upon respondent No.2-owner of the offending vehicle has been dispensed with. Heaving heard the learned advocate for respective parties, it is found that the appellants- claimants have precisely raised two issues in the present appeal, firstly that the learned tribunal erred in determining the income of the deceased on the basis of net income and secondly the claimants 4 are entitled to an amount equaling to 40% of the annual income of the deceased towards future prospect. With regard to the first issue relating to determination of income by the learned tribunal, it is found that the learned tribunal has taken into account the net income of the deceased-victim on the basis of salary particulars (Exhibit-7) produced by the claimants. On perusal of salary particulars it appears that save and except gross payment and net payment there are no such columns specifying the heads of deductions. PW-3, Ranjan Chanda, Personal Manager of ECL Jambad colliery, produced the salary particulars of the deceased, however he failed to clarify the amount of deduction that were made from the gross payment of the deceased- victim. The claimants have not taken any further steps to clarify the situation. In the absence of such cogent evidence, I do not find any infirmity in the finding of the learned tribunal determining the income of the deceased on his net income. So far as the entitlement of future prospect is concerned, it is found that the learned tribunal allowed 25% of the annual income of the deceased towards future prospect. Mr. Roy, learned advocate for appellants-claimants asserted that the deceased was in a permanent employment with the ECL. It is relevant to note from the salary particulars (Exhibit- 5 7) that for the month of October, 2011 and April, 2012 the victim did not receive any payment due to non-attendance. Thus, from the above factor it manifest that the deceased was employed in no- work-no pay basis which is temporary in nature. Therefore, since the deceased at the time of accident was 35 years of age and was in temporary employment with the ECL, following the observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s Case (Supra) the claimants are entitled to additional amount equaling to 40% of the annual income of the deceased towards future prospect. The other factors and findings of the learned tribunal has not been challenged in the appeal. In view of the above discussion calculation of compensation is made hereunder. Calculation of compensation Annual Income…………………………..………… Rs.99,120/- Add: Future Prospects @ 40% of total Income..Rs.39,648/- Annual loss of Income……………………………….1,38,768/- Less: Deduction of 1/3rd of the Annual Income (towards personal and living expenses)..……... …….Rs.46,256/- Rs.92,512/- Adopting multiplier 16 ( Rs.92,512/- X 16)…Rs.14,80,192/- Add: General Damages……….……….………Rs.70,000/- Total Compensation……………………15,50,192/- Thus, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 15,50,192/-. Admittedly the claimants have received Rs.15,23,760/-together with interest as granted by the learned tribunal. Accordingly the claimants are entitled to enhance amount of compensation of 6 Rs.26,432/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till deposit. Respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the balance amount of compensation of Rs. 26,432/- alongwith interest 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till deposit within six weeks from date. Appellants-claimants are directed to deposit ad valorem court fees on the balance amount of compensation, if not already paid. Learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta shall release the amount of compensation in favour of the claimants in equal proportion upon satisfaction of their identity and on payment of ad valorem court fees, if not already paid. With the aforesaid observation the appeal stands disposed of. The impugned judgment and award of the learned tribunal stands modified to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. All connected applications, if any, stands disposed of. Interim orders, if any, stands disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order if applied for be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)