Allahabad High Court
Smt. Vijay Luxmi And Others vs Mohammad Zafar And Others on 7 April, 2022
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, Ajai Tyagi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 2
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 353 of 2022
Appellant :- Smt. Vijay Luxmi And Others
Respondent :- Mohammad Zafar And Others
Counsel for Appellant :- A.K.Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Saurabh Srivastava
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and order impugned.
2. This appeal is of the year 2004, this Court has requested the learned counsel for the respondent to request one of the officer to remain present. Learned counsel for the appellant has also requested for conciliation in the matter.
3. This appeal, at the behest of the claimant, challenges the judgment and order dated 03.09.2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.14, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P No.585 of 1999 awarding a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7%.
4. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is also not in dispute. The only issue to be decided is the quantum of compensation awarded, hence, facts are not narrated as the claimants- insurance company counsel have decided to accept conciliation
5. The accident took place on 27.5.1999. The deceased was 45 years of age and was businessman by profession. The Tribunal considered his income to be Rs.2500/- per month, deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, granted multiplier of 13, awarded Rs. 33,000/- for medical expenses and awarded Rs.7,000/- towards non pecuniary damages and that is how the Tribunal has calculated the total compensation to be Rs.3,00,000/-
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in the instant case, the income of the deceased as decided by the tribunal Rs.25,00/- per month is not disturbed to which 25% will be added for future loss of income of which 1/4th will be deducted, multiplier of 13 is just and proper, there are 6 minor children Rs. 50,000/- for non pecuniary damages and Rs. 50,000/- for the widow.
7. Hence, the total compensation payable to the appellants is computed herein below:
i. Monthly Income: Rs.2,500/-
ii. Percentage towards future prospects : 25% namely Rs.625/-
iii. Total income : Rs.2,500 +Rs. 625/- = Rs.3125/-
iv. Income after deduction of 1/4 towards personal expenses : Rs.2344/-(rounded off)
v. Annual income : Rs. 2344/- x 12 = Rs.28,128/-
vi. Multiplier applicable : 13
vii. Loss of dependency: Rs.28,128 x 13 = Rs.3,65,664/-
viii. Amount under non pecuniary heads : Rs 50,000/- + Rs. 50,000/- (for wife of deceased)
ix. Total compensation : Rs.4,65,664/-
8. As far as issue of rate of interest is concerned, it would be calculated at 4% on the enhanced amount throughout as the parties have conciliated and decided to accept the calculation.
9. No other grounds are urged orally when the matter was heard.
10. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of 12 weeks from today with interest at the rate of 4% on the enhanced amount throughout. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
11. The Tribunal shall follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Private Ltd. v. Union of India and others vide order dated 27.1.2022, as the purpose of keeping compensation is to safeguard the interest of the claimants. As 10 years have elapsed, the amount be deposited in the Saving Account of claimants in Nationalized Bank without F.D.R.
12. The undersigned is thankful to Sri Abhishek Yadav, officer of Insurance Co. who has remain present and permitted the Court to conciliate in this old matter. As the matter is conciliated there shall be no deduction for the delay of 5 days in filing the appeal.
13. This Court is thankful to Sri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent for conciliating in this matter.
Order Date :- 7.4.2022
PS
