Kusma Devi And 3 Others vs Jitendra Kumar And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15951 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Kusma Devi And 3 Others vs Jitendra Kumar And 2 Others on 7 May, 2024

Author: Vipin Chandra Dixit

Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:81993
 
Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 233 of 2019
 

 
Appellant :- Kusma Devi And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- Jitendra Kumar And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Singh,Amit Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Rahul Sahai
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
 

Heard Sri Ram Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the Insurance Company-respondent no.3. No one is present for respondent nos.1 & 2.

This first appeal from order has been filed by the appellants-claimants against the judgment and award dated 14.9.2018 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Fatehpur in M.A.C.P. No.327 of 2017 (Smt. Kusuma Devi and others vs. Jitendra Kumar and others) awarding compensation of Rs.5,79,283/- alongwith 6% annual simple interest to the claimants on account of death of Man Singh Yadav aged 59 years.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that very meagre amount of compensation has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal. It is further submitted that nothing has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal in terms of future prospects and only Rs.20,000/- was awarded for non-pecuniary damages, whereas the claimants are entitled for 15% future prospects and Rs.70,000/- for non pecuniary damages in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017(4) T.A.C. 673. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for appellants that the age of deceased was 59 years at the time of accident and the Claims Tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of '7', whereas it should be '9' in view of Table provided in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Road Transport Corporation reported in 2009(2) TAC 677 (S.C.).

On the other hand, learned counsel for Insurance Company-opposite party No.3 has not disputed the aforesaid legal position.

Considered the rival submissions of learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

It is admitted fact that the age of the deceased was 58 years 9 months 4 days at the time of accident and as per service condition the retirement age was 60 years and there was no provision for pension and as such, the claimants are not entitled for any amount towards future prospects. The appellant no.2 to 4 are major sons of the deceased and they are not dependents on the income of the deceased and as such, deduction would be 1/3 in place of 1/4th. The compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is reassessed as below:-

1) Monthly income = Rs.35,265/-

2) Annual income = Rs. 35,265/- X 12 = Rs.4,23,180/-

3) Deduction towards

personal expenses(1/3rd) = Rs.4,23,180/- - Rs.1,41,060/- =Rs.2,82,120/-

6) Multiplier applicable (9) =Rs.2,82,120/- x 9 = Rs.25,39,080/-

7) Non-pecuniary damages =Rs.70,000/-

Total = Rs.25,39,080/- + Rs.70,000/- = Rs.26,09,080/-

In view of aforesaid discussion, the appeal filed by claimants is hereby partly allowed and award of the Claims Tribunal is modified and compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.5,79,283/- to Rs.26,09,080/-.

The claimants-appellants are also entitled to 6% interest on the enhanced amount from the date of award dated 14.9.2018.

The United India Assurance Company Limited/opposite party No.3 is directed to pay enhanced amount alongwith interest to the claimants within two months from today.

No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 7.5.2024

P.P.