Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
26 2021 Smt. Sangeeta Layek & Anr vs 30 The National Insurance Co. Ltd. ... on 16 August, 2021
Ct.
No. 16.8 F.M.A.T. 524 of 2014
26 2021 Smt. Sangeeta Layek & Anr.
Vs.
30 The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
akb ( Via Video Conference )
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy ...For the Appellants/Claimants
Mr. Afroze Alam ...For the Respondent/Insurance Co.
The appeal is directed against the judgment and
award dated January 31, 2014 passed by the learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, 4th Court, Asansol, in M.A.C. Case No. 15
of 2012 / 74 of 2011.
Various points have been raised by the
appellants/claimants in the instant appeal challenging the
quantum of compensation.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy, learned Counsel appearing
on behalf of the claimants/appellants submitted that the
learned Tribunal erred in law in deducting fifty per cent of
the income of the deceased, instead of one-third on account
of 'personal expenses'. Furthermore, claimants were not
granted any amount under 'future prospect'. Lastly,
claimants plead that considering the 53 years of age of the
deceased, the correct multiplier should have been 11, instead
of 7, applied by the learned Tribunal in the impugned award.
Accordingly, it was argued that lesser quantum of
compensation has been wrongfully awarded by the learned
Tribunal.
Per contra, the learned Counsel representing the
Insurance Company argues in the facts and cirucmstances of
the case, the award passed by the learned Tribunal is
absolutely just and reasonable and there is no scope for
enhancement of the award.
Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties and perused the materials placed on record.
Considering the decisions 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 this Court finds substance
in the arguments of the appellants. Appellants are justified in
praying for 15% addition on account of 'future prospect' on
the income of the 53 years old deceased and 1/3rd deduction
on account of personal expenses of the deceased. The
multiplier should also be of 11 purchase factor. The
claimants/appellants are also entitled to get General
Damages Rs.30,000/- instead of Rs.4,500/- in view of the
settled law.
Accordingly, the ratio as decided in Sarala Varma
(Supra) as well as Pranay Sethi (Supra), the award passed by
the Tribunal is modified and recalculated as follows :
Monthly income Rs. 26,473/-
Annual Income (26,473 X 12) Rs. 3,17,676/-
1/3rd deduction on personal Expenses Rs. 1,05,892/-
Rs. 2,11,784/-
Add. 15% 'future prospect' Rs. 31,767/-
Rs. 2,43,551/-
Age 53 years, (2,43,551 X 11 Multiplier)
Total Pecuniary compensation Rs.26,79,061/-
General Damages Rs. 30,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.27,09,061/-
Mr. Roy acknowledges that his clients have
already received the entire awarded sum of Rs.11,16,366/-
along with interest. The balance sum of Rs.15,92,695/-
would become payable to the appellants by the Insurance
Company together with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per
annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the
balance sum paid to the appellants within a period of 45 days
from the receipt of the particulars of their bank accounts to
be supplied by the learned Counsel for the appellants to the
learned Counsel for the Insurance Company.
It is made clear that the payments shall be made
by NEFT/RTGS in the same manner and proportion as
decided by the Court below.
With the aforesaid directions the instant appeal is
disposed of.
In view of disposal of the appeal, connected
application, if any, is also disposed of. The concerned
Department is directed to trace out the application and tag
the same with this appeal.
There shall be no further order as to costs.
LCR, if any, may be returned back to the Court
below.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all
formalities, on priority basis.
( Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)
