Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Chinta Devi & Ors vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & ... on 30 June, 2021
30.06.2021
ss
F.M.A.T. 1372 of 2019
I.A. No. 1 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 1627 of 2020)
I.A. No. 2 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 1628 of 2020)
( Via Video Conference )
Chinta Devi & ors.
Vs.
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & ors.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy
...For the Appellants/claimants
Mr. Rajesh Singh
... For the respondent/Insurance Co.
CAN No. 1627 of 2020
Since the original application for condonation of
delay being CAN 1627 of 2020 is not found in the file, the
photostat copy of the application of delay is taken on
record and the same be treated as original.
On perusal of the pleadings, the Court is satisfied
that cause shown for delay in filing the instant appeal is
sufficient and prayer for condonation of delay should be
allowed.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of
delay stands allowed.
By consent of the parties, instant appeal is treated
as on day's list and is taken up for hearing.
The department is directed to issue F.M.A. number
immediately.
CAN No. 1628 of 2020
The above application is filed by the
appellants/claimants for recording the attainment of
majority of appellant no. 3 namely, Karan Das. Such
application is allowed.
Department is directed to tag the application with
the instant appeal.
F.M.A.T. No. 1372 of 2019
The appeal is directed against the judgment and
order dated August 13, 2019 passed by the learned
Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional
District Judge, 3rd Court, Asansol, Paschim Bardhaman
in M.A.C Case No. 184 of 2012, on a claim under section
166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death of one
'Prayag Das' in a road accident dated July 12, 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 claimants were not granted any amount under
'future prospect'. Claimants argue that in view of 4 nos. of
dependants, deduction for 'personal expenses' should by
1/4th and not 1/3rd of victim's income. Lastly, claimants
state that they were given only Rs.55,000/- instead of
Rs.70,000/- under the full component of 'general
damages'. Accordingly, it was argued that a lesser
quantum of compensation has been erroneously awarded
by the Tribunal.
The Insurance Company is represented.
Considering the judgements 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. Appellants are justified in praying for 40%
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 deduction for
'personal expenses', should be 1/4th of the income of the
deceased as there were four numbers of dependent
claimants. Accordingly, the impugned award is modified
and recalculated in the manner referred hereinafter.
The annual income of the 30 years old victim
being Rs.1,55,675/-, upon addition of 40% 'future
prospect' comes to Rs.2,17,945/-. After deducting 1/4th
for 'personal expenses', it is the amount of Rs.1,63,459/-
on which the multiplier of 16 is applied to reach the net
pecuniary compensation of Rs.26,15,344/-. Claimants
are also entitled to Rs.70,000/- on account of loss of
consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, taking
the gross compensation to Rs.26,85,344/- 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 awarded
amount of Rs.17,15,577/- along with interest.
Accordingly, the balance enhanced sum of Rs.9,69,767/-
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.
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 concerned
Department is directed to tag the applications, if any,
with the main appeal.
There will be no order as to costs.
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.)
