Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Santana Chowdhury & Ors on 4 August, 2021
04.08.2021
ss ( Via Video Conference )
F.M.A. 194 of 2021
I.A. No. CAN 2 of 2020
,
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Vs.
Santana Chowdhury & ors.
Mr. Rajesh Singh
...For the Appellants/Insurance Co.
Mr. Saidur Rahaman
... for the respondents/claimants
The appeal of Insurance Company is preferred
against the judgment and award dated December 20,
2019 passed by the Learned Judge, Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Fast Track, 2nd Court, Malda, in MAC Case No. 31 of
2018 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
praying for compensation for the death of one 41 years
old 'Dwijen Chowdhury', who died in a road accident
dated January 1, 2018.
The learned Advocate for the appellant has
challenged the quantum of compensation mainly on the
ground that the assessment of compensation on the basis
of income of the deceased at Rs.350/- per day, in absence
of proper evidence, was erroneous. As an additional
ground, insurance company disputes the involvement of
offending vehicle in the accident for the reason that the
registration number of the said vehicle as mentioned in
the 'First Information Report' did not match with the
charge sheet.
The learned Advocate for the claimants/
respondents submit that Learned Tribunal erred in
deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased for
'personal expenses', in spite of the fact that there were
four (4) numbers of dependents. It is further submitted
that Court below was not specific in fixing the rate of
'interest' on the compensation amount.
Considering the judgements of Smt. Sarla Verma
& Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.,
reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance
Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in
(2017) 16 SCC 680, and also following the precedence of
this Court on the point of monthly income, I find
substance in the arguments of the appellant. For the
year 2018, in a claim under section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, in absence of any evidence, an
amount of Rs.5,000/- per month appears to be just and
reasonable. Claimants are however justified in asking for
1/4th deduction of the income of the deceased on the
ground of 'personal expenses'. This court also considers
that rate of 'interest' should be 6% per annum on the
compensation amount, to be calculated from the date of
filing of claim case till realization. As the seizure list,
charge sheet and statement of eye witness, all confirm
that the offending vehicle was involved in the accident,
insurer's plea of 'non-involvement' of the vehicle does not
hold any good.
Accordingly, the impugned award is modified and
recalculated in the manner referred to hereinafter.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Monthly Income Rs.5,000/-
Annual Income Rs.60,000/-
Less 1/4th for personal expenses
(Rs.15,000/-) Rs.45,000/-
Add 25% future prospect
(Rs.11,250/-) Rs.56,250/-
Multiplier '14' Rs.7,84,000/-
Add 'General Damages' Rs.70,000/-
TOTAL Principal Compensation Rs.8,54,000/-
Accordingly, the said amount of Rs.8,54,000/-
would become payable to the claimants/respondents by
the Insurance Company, together with interest assessed
at the rate of 6 percent per annum on and from the date
of filing of the claim petition within a period of 45 days
from the date of receipt of bank account details of the
claimants. The learned Advocate for the appellants will
forward the bank account details of the claimants within
a fortnight from the date to the learned Advocate for the
Insurance Company. The payment shall be made directly
in the bank accounts of the claimants through
NEFT/RTGS, in the proportion decided by the Court
below.
Insurance Company is given liberty to withdraw the
statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- along with the accrued
interest from the Registrar General of this Court.
With the aforesaid directions the instant appeal is
disposed of.
In view of disposal of the appeal, connected
application, if any, are also disposed of. The department
concerned is directed to tag the applications, if any, with
the main file.
There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of
formalities on priority basis.
(Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)
