Akb vs The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3815 Cal

Ct.
No.   15.7                         F.M.A.T. 999 of 2010
26    2021                                  With
                                    IA No. CAN 1 of 2021
 4                                 Shrimati Haldar & Anr.
akb                                          Vs.
                           The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
                                  ( Via Video Conference )

             Mr. Jayanta Banerjee        ...For the Appellants/Claimants

             Mr. Rajesh Singh            ...For the Respondent/Insurance Co.

The appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 25th day of March, 2014, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Nadia in M.A.C. Case No.204 of 2012.

Various points have been raised by the claimants in the instant appeal challenging the quantum of compensation. It is submitted on behalf of the appellants that the monthly income of Rs.3,000/- of the victim considered by the learned Judge was inadequate. Further, the claimants were not granted any amount under 'future prospect'. Claimants also submit that they were erroneously given only Rs.9,500/- instead of Rs.70,000/- under the full component of 'general damages'. Lastly, claimants plead that the learned Judge erred in not granting 'interest' on the compensation amount. Accordingly, it was argued that a lesser quantum of compensation has been wrongfully awarded by the learned Tribunal.

Per contra, the learned Counsel representing the Insurance Company argues that the award is just and reasonable and there is no further scope of enhancement of the same.

Considering the decisions of 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, I find substance in the arguments of the appellants. For the year 2012, in a claim under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an amount of Rs.4,000/- per month does not appear to be exorbitant. Appellants are justified in praying for 25% addition on account of 'future prospect' on the income of the deceased and they should also get Rs.70,000/- under collective heads of general damages. The appellants however admit that the correct multiplier, in the instant case should be '14' instead of '15' as applied by the Court below.

Accordingly, the impugned award is modified and recalculated in the manner referred hereinafter:-

Monthly Income                                Rs.4,000/-
Annual Income                                 Rs.48,000/
Less 1/3rd for personal
expenses (Rs.16,000/-)                        Rs.32,000/-

Add 25% future prospect (Rs.8,000/-)          Rs.40,000/-
Multiplier '14'                               Rs.5,60,000/-
Add 'General Damages'                         Rs.70,000/-
TOTAL Principal Compensation                  Rs.6,30,000/-
LESS - awarded by Tribunal and
paid by insurer                               Rs.3,69,500/-

BALANCE (enhancement)                         Rs.2,60,500/-

The claimants acknowledge receipt of the awarded amount of Rs.3,69,500/- in terms of the direction of the tribunal. Accordingly, the balance enhanced sum of Rs.2,60,500/- would become payable to the appellants by the Insurance Company, 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. If it is found that claimants did not receive any interest on the already awarded and paid amount of Rs.3,69,500/-, insurer shall pay interest on the said amount at the same rate of 6% as directed above, from the date of filing of claim application till the date of payment.

Learned Counsel for the appellants will forward the bank account details of the appellants within a fortnight from date to the learned Counsel 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 concerned Department is directed to tag the applications, if any, with the main 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.)