Rahila Bibi Mondal & Ors vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3549 Cal

15 02.07.2021                  (Via Video Conference)
Sc
                                 F.M.A.T 113 of 2019
                                          with
                                 I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2021
                                (application is not traceable in the file)
                                             --------------

Rahila Bibi Mondal & Ors.

Vs.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Mr. Muktakesh Das ...For the Appellants/ Claimants

Mrs. Sucharita Paul ...For the Respondent/ Insurance Co.

I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2021

---------------

On perusal of the pleadings, this Court is satisfied

that cause shown for delay in filing of the appeal is

sufficient and prayer for condonation of delay should be

allowed.

Accordingly, the application for condonation of

delay stands allowed.

FMAT 113 OF 2019

The above appeal has been filed against the

judgment and order dated 16th July, 2018 passed by the

Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal &

Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court - IV,

Krishnagar, Nadia, in M.A.C Case No. 323 of 2014, on a

claim under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The claimants submit that victim was earning Rs.

7,000/- per month as a mason. The tribunal erred in

accepting the monthly income to be only Rs. 3,000/-. The

appellants further point out that the claimants are also

entitled to Rs. 70,000/- under collective heads of general

damages in view of the law as it stands now, after the

judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi

& Ors., reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680.

Mrs. Paul, the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of

the insurance company argues that the Ld. Tribunal was

correct in accepting the income of the victim to be

Rs.3,000/- in absence of any documentary evidence. It is

further submitted by the Insurance Company that in view

of the judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court on

case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport

Corporation & Anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, the

multiplier in instant case should have been 15 instead of

16, as has been adopted by the Court below.

This Court is inclined to accept the submissions

made on behalf of the insurance company. However, it is

now accepted in this court for some time that between the

years 2011 to 2014, the base income has to be taken at

Rs.4,000/- per month. Moreover, such amount of Rs.

4000/- per month does not appear to be exorbitant at all

for the year 2014, as an unskilled worker working on all

days could have earned Rs. 4000/- per month.

Accordingly, considering the submissions as

advanced by the learned advocates for the parties, the

award is modified and reassessed. Upon taking the

monthly income of the victim to be Rs. 4,000/- and

adding 40% on account of future prospects, the total

notional monthly income comes to Rs. 5,600/-. After

annualising such amount and deducting one fifth on

account of personal expenses, it is the figure of Rs.

53,760/- on which the multiplier of 15 will have to be

applied. The net pecuniary compensation comes to Rs.

8,06,400/-. After adding a further sum of Rs. 70,000/- on

account of loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral

expenses, the gross compensation comes to Rs.

8,76,400/- together with interest thereon at the rate of

6% per annum from the date of lodging the claim till the

date of receipt of the amount.

The claimants acknowledge receipt of the entire

awarded amount along with interest. The balance sum of

Rs. 1,77,280/- would be paid to the appellants together

with interest assessed at the rate of 6 per cent 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 the bank

account particulars of the appellants. Advocate for the

Appellants will forward the bank account details of the

appellants within a fortnight from date to Advocate for the

insurance company. The payment shall be made in the

proportion decided by the Court below.

With the aforesaid directions the instant appeal is

disposed of.

In view of the disposal of this appeal, connected

applications, if any, are also disposed of. The Department

concerned is directed to tag the applications, if any, with

the main appeal

The department is directed to send down the LCR.

Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for,

be furnished upon compliance of all formalities.

(Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)