Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rangila Begum & Ors vs The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & ... on 2 July, 2021
S/L 18
02.7.2021
Court No.26
SD
FMAT 1163 of 2019
With
CAN 1 of 2019
(Old CAN 11094 of 2019)
(Via Video Conference)
Rangila Begum & Ors.
Vs.
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy
... for the Appellants/ Claimants.
Ms. Sucharita Paul
... for the Respondents/Insurance Co.
CAN 1 of 2019 (Old CAN 11094 of 2019):
This is an application for condonaion of delay in filling
the instant appeal.
On perusal of the pleading, this court is satisfied that
cause shown for delay in filling of the appeal is sufficient and
prayer for condonation of delay should be allowed.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay
being CAN 1 of 2019 (old CAN 11094 of 2019) stands allowed.
FMAT 1163 of 2019:
The above appeal has been filed against the judgment
and award dated June 12, 2019 passed by the Judge, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, 1st Court, Burdwan, Purba
Bardhaman, in M.A.C Case No. 13 of 2015, on a claim under
section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy, counsel appearing on behalf of
the claimants submit that the 22 years old victim was earning
Rs.12,000/- per month as a mason. However, Tribunal
erroneously took the income to be Rs.3,000/- per month.
The appellants further submit that the multiplier adopted
should have been 18 instead of 17 and the claimants are
entitled to 40% future prospects on the income of the
deceased in view of the law as it stands now after the
judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
cases 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.
Mrs. Sucharita Paul, counsel appearing on behalf of
the insurance company argues that the Tribunal was correct
in accepting the income of the victim to be Rs.3,000/- in
absence of any documentary evidence.
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 2015 onwards, the
base income has to be taken at Rs.5,000/- per month.
Moreover, such amount of Rs.5,000/- per month does not
appear to be exorbitant at all for the year 2015, as an
unskilled worker working on all days could have earned
Rs.5,000/- per month. Accordingly, on such basis and
considering the submissions as advanced by the learned
advocates for the parties, in my opinion, the income of the
victim should be taken as Rs.5,000/- per month.
The award is therefore modified and reassessed. Upon
taking the monthly income of the victim to be Rs.5,000/-
and adding 40% on account of future prospects, the total
notional monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/-. After
annualising such amount and deducting one third on account
of personal expenses, it is the figure of Rs.56,000/- on which
the multiplier of 18 will have to be applied. Accordingly, the
net pecuniary compensation comes to Rs.10,08,000/-. 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.10,78,000/- 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 of Rs.4,78,000/-along with interest. The
balance sum of Rs.6,00,000/- 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.
There shall be no order as to costs.
In view of the disposal of this appeal, connected
applications, if any, are also disposed of.
The Registry is directed to send down the lower court
records at once, if received by this time.
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.)
