Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rita Karmakar & Ors vs The United India Insurance Co. ... on 23 August, 2021
23.08.2021
ss
F.M.A. 277 of 2021
( Via Video Conference )
Rita Karmakar & ors.
Vs.
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & anr.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy
...For the Appellants/claimants
Mr. Sanjay Paul
... For the respondent No.1/Insurance Co.
The appeal is directed against the judgment and
award dated November 27, 2020 passed by the Learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge and Judge, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track, 2nd Court, Purba
Bardhaman, in MAC Case No. 44 of 2016/272 of 2016,
on a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 for the death of one Mohan Karmakar in a road
accident on 22nd June, 2016.
Facts
of the case are not in dispute.
The main contention of the appellants in the
instant appeal is quantum of compensation.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy, learned Counsel, appearing
on behalf of the appellants submits that the learned
Tribunal committed error in law while assessing the
monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3000/- instead of
Rs.9,000/.
Mr. Roy further submits that the claimants have
also been deprived by the tribunal for not granting 25%
additional income towards future prospect since the
deceased was 44 years old self employed person.
Accordingly, Mr. Roy submits that the learned
Tribunal granted inadequate compensation and
accordingly, the award should be enhanced.
Per contra, Mr. Sanjay Paul learned Advocate
appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company submits
that the learned Tribunal rightly assessed the income of
the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month notionally in
absence of any documentary evidence and there is no
scope of interference and/or enhancement by the Hon'ble
High Court at this stage.
Having heard the submissions of the parties,
considered the reported judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Smt. Sarala Verma & Ors. -Vs.-
Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., reported in (2009)
6 SCC 121 and in National Insurance Company
Limited -Vs.- Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in (2017)
16 SCC 680 and also followed the precedence of this
court on the point of monthly income, I find some
substance on the submission of the appellants. For the
year 2016, in a claim under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act 1988, an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month
does not appear to be exorbitant. The appellants are also
entitled to get 25% additional amount towards future
prospect of the deceased.
Accordingly, the impugned award is required to be
modified in the following manner :
Mode of assessment Amount
Monthly income Rs. 5,000/-
Yearly income (X12) Rs.60,000/-
After 1/3 deduction Rs.40,000/-
(60000-20000)
25% future prospect Rs.10,000/-
(40000X25%)
Total loss of income Rs. 50,000/-
Age 44 Multiplier 14 Rs. 7,00,000/-
(50000X14)
General damages Rs. 70,000/-
Total compensation Rs.7,70,000/-
Tribunal awarded Rs 4,06,000/-
Compensation payable Rs.3,64,000/-
Mr. Roy acknowledged that the appellants/
claimants received the entire awarded amount of
Rs.4,06,000/- along with interest in terms of the direction
of the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the balance
enhanced sum of Rs.3,64,000/- would become payable to
the appellants/claimants by the respondent Insurance
company together with interest assessed @ 6% per
annum on and from date of filing of the claim application
(i.e. 05/07/2016) till the date of payment.
The respondent/Insurance Company is hereby
directed to pay Rs.3,64,000/- along with 6% interest per
annum on and from the date of filing the claim
application i.e. 05/07/2016 till payment within a period
of 45 days from date.
It is made clear that all the payments shall be made
through NEFT/RTGS to the bank accounts of the
appellants/claimants and for such purpose the learned
Advocate for the appellants/claimants shall furnish bank
accounts particulars of the appellants/claimants to the
learned advocate for the Insurance Company within two
weeks.
With the aforesaid directions, the instant appeal is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
In view of the disposal of this appeal, connected
application, if any, is also disposed of.
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.)
