Allahabad High Court
Dev Nath Pandey & Others vs U.P.S.R.T.C. on 18 August, 2017
Bench: Saumitra Dayal Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
AFR
Court No. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 938 of 1997
Appellant :- Dev Nath Pandey & Others
Respondent :- U.P.S.R.T.C.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pankaj Kumar Srivastava,Nitin Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- S K Mishra
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
This appeal has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal vide its award dated 07.08.1997 in Claim Petition No. 418 of 1991.
It is a death case. Admittedly, the deceased Supriya Pandey was 7-8 years of age, when on 15.11.1991 at about 11.30 a.m. she was going toward school, while crossing the road she was hit by a bus of the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') bearing registration no. UP 70A 9800. In that accident she got crushed under the front rear of bus and is stated to have admitted at Swaroop Rani Hospital, Allahabad, where she expired on 19.11.1991. Arising from the aforesaid accidental death, the aforesaid claim petition was filed by parents of the deceased.
The Tribunal framed two issues being whether the accident had been caused due to rash and negligent conduct of the driver of the corporation bus and what amount of compensation the claimants were entitled to.
Undisputedly, accident had been caused due to rash and negligent conduct of the driver of the corporation bus as has been recorded by the Tribunal. That finding of the award itself has not been challenged by the corporation.
The Tribunal awarded Rs. 55,000/- by way of compensation on a sump-sum basis.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the award of compensation is on very less. He relies on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others reported in 2002 (1) TAC 138 (S.C.) to contend that at least Rs. 2,00,000/- should have been awarded by way of compensation in accordance the aforesaid judgment, wherein the Supreme Court had itself awarded the amount of compensation in respect of claim arising on the death of children between the age group of 5 to 10 years.
Learned counsel for the respondent corporation on the other hand submits that the judgment in the case of Lata Wadhwa (supra) was based in the peculiar facts of that case as has been noted in paragraph 14 of the that judgment. He then states that the Supreme Court awarded compensation to Rs. 2,00,000/-in respect of death of children between the age of 5 to 10 years on the following reasoning contained in that judgment:
"Having regard to the environment from which these children were brought, their parents being reasonably well placed officials of the Tata Iron and Steel Company, and on considering the submission of Mr. Nariman, we would direct that the compensation amount for the children between the age group of 5 to 10 years should be three times. In other words, it should be Rs. 1.5 lakh, to which the conventional figure of Rs. 50,000/- should be added and thus the total amount in each case would be Rs. 2,00,000/-."
The said judgment is clearly distinguishable, it having been passed in the peculiar facts of that case. The Supreme Court had based it's judgment considering the social and financial background of the parents of the deceased children. No such fact has been established here. Also, the accident in that case was of much later than 1991 which is the date of accident in the present case. Then learned counsel for the appellant has relied on a Division Bench Judgment in First Appeal From Order No. 1580 of 2013 decided on 14.02.2017, wherein in respect of death of three year old child the Division Bench has enhanced the compensation to Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest. He would therefore, contend a similar enhancement is called for in the present case also.
Learned counsel for the respondent corporation on the other hand submits that the aforesaid Division Bench judgment has been passed in respect of an award which is dated 20.01.2013. It reflects that perhaps the accident, in that case, would have occurred not earlier than year 2010 as normally such claim petitions get decided in a period of two to three years. On the other hand he submits, the accident in the instant case had occurred in the year 1991 i.e. almost 20 years before the case giving rise to the aforesaid Division Bench judgment.
At present, learned counsel for the appellant is not in a position to state the date of accident involved with the aforesaid Division Bench judgment. In any case, it does not appear from the judgment of the Division Bench, the accident would have occurred in the year 1991.
Then learned counsel for the appellant also relied upon a judgment of this court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Deputy Manager (Legal Cell) Vs. Mumtaz Ahmad and another reported in 2017 (122) ALR 695, which had arisen from death, wherein the amount of compensation of award stated to have been increased to Rs. 2,25,000/-. However, perusal of that judgment does make clear, the date of accident or the age of the deceased though the claim petition is of the year 2001.
Learned counsel for the respondent corporation, on the other hand relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satender reported in 2006 (13) SCC 60 submits that though minor children may not have earning capacity such as to determine the loss of dependency to award compensation on that basis, yet, as has been held by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case, certain amounts are to be awarded even on lump-sum basis.
In this regard para 12 of the aforesaid judgment is relevant for our purpose which is quoted herein below:-
"12 In cases of young children of tender age, in view of uncertainties abound, neither their income at the time of death nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an early age, the uncerainties in regard to their academic pursuits, achievements in career and thereafter advancement in life are so many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable certainty. Therefore, neither the income of the deceased child is capable of assessment on estimated basis nor the financial loss suffered by the parents is capable of mathematical computation."
In this case the accident had occurred on 15.11.1991. As such the award of compensation at Rs. 1,80,000/- in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satender (supra) would be excessive as that the case appears to have arisen from a much later accident.
In the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, the award of Rs. 1,25,000/- as compensation made by the impugned award is sustained though it is payable on lump-sum basis in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satender (supra) and not on a criteria relied upon by the Tribunal.
Accordingly, the total amount of compensation awarded is enhanced to Rs. 1,25,000/-. The corporation shall now deposit the difference of the amount of compensation award being Rs. 1,25,000/- less amount already paid, together with 9% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment.
The appeal is thus partly allowed. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 18.8.2017
Lbm/-
