Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
26 2021 Sipra Roy & Ors vs 2 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & ... on 8 November, 2021
Ct.
No. 08.11 F.M.A. 121 of 2001
26 2021 Sipra Roy & Ors.
Vs.
2 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
akb ( Via Video Conference )
Mr. Saidur Rahaman ...For the Appellants/Claimants
Mr. Rajesh Singh ...For the Respondent/Insurance Co.
Re.: IA No. CAN 4 of 2019 (Old No. 12222 of 2019).
This is an application for expunging the name of
Nilima Roy, the claimant/appellant No. 3, who died intestate
on February 19, 2017 and also for noting of attainment of
majority of claimant No. 2, Indrani Roy, who became major
on July 10, 2008, having date of birth on July 10, 1990.
Since the original application is not found in the
file, photostat copy of the application is taken on record by
treating the same as original one.
Considering the materials placed on record and
submissions made by the parties, I am inclined to allow the
said application. The deceased appellant N. 3 has left behind
two legal heirs and both are already on record in the cause
title of the Memorandum of Appeal, being appellant Nos. 1
and 2, namely Sipra Roy and Indrani Roy.
The department is directed to expunge the name
of appellant No. 3, Nilima Roy from the cause title of the
Memorandum of Appeal.
The claimant No. 2 Indrani Roy, be treated and
noted as major.
The application is disposed of.
F.M.A. 121 of 2001.
This appeal is directed against the judgement and
award dated August 12, 1997 passed by the learned Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalpaiguri in M.A.C. Case
No. 93 of 1996 on a claim under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death of one 35 years old 'Manoj
Kumar Roy' in a vehicular accident dated December 20,
1995. Deceased was an employee of 'Dhupguri Sukanta
Mahavidyalaya'.
Various points have been raised by the claimants
in the instant appeal challenging the quantum of
compensation. Claimants submit that victim was getting
Rs.2,343/- as gross monthly salary but learned Judge erred in
considering the income of the victim at Rs.1,500/- per
month. It is further submitted that claimants were not
granted any amount under 'future prospect'. The appellants
plead that they were not given full component of general
damages and deduction of personal expenses should be 1/3rd
of the victim's income. Accordingly, it was argued that a
lesser quantum of compensation has been wrongfully
awarded by the Tribunal.
The claimants however admit that considering the
age of the deceased, the correct multiplier should be of '16'
purchase factor.
Per contra, learned Counsel representing the
Insurance Company argues that in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the award is just and reasonable
and there is no further scope of enhancement of the same.
Considering judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the cases of Smt. Sarala Verma & Ors. -Vs.- Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and
in the case of National Insurance Company Limited -Vs.- Pranay
Sethi & Ors., reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, I find substance in
the submissions of the appellants/claimants. Victim was
getting a gross monthly salary of Rs.2,343/- and as an
abundant caution, after deducting Rs.143/- for statutory
deductions, the net salary of Rs.2,200/- is taken for
assessment of compensation. Considering the age of 35 years
of the victim, the multiplier of 16 would be applicable and
'future prospect' of 50% is to be given to the claimants.
Appellants are also entitled to Rs.70,000/- under collective
heads of general damages.
Accordingly, the impugned award is required to
be modified and recalculated in the manner referred
hereinafter.
Monthly Income Rs. 2,200/-
Annual Income Rs. 26,400/-
Add: 50% future prospect (Rs.13,200/-) Rs. 39.600/-
Less 1/3rd for personal expenses (Rs.13,200/-) Rs. 26,400/-
Multiplier '16' Rs. 4,22,400/-
Add 'General Damages' Rs. 70,000/-
TOTAL Principal Compensation Rs. 4,92,400/-
LESS - awarded by Tribunal Rs. 3,00,000/-
and paid by insurer
BALANCE (enhancement) Rs. 1,92,400/-
The claimants acknowledge receipt of the
awarded amount of Rs.3,00,000/- along with interest in
terms of direction of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the
balance enhanced sum of Rs.1,92,400/- would become
payable to the appellants by the Insurance Copmpany,
together with interest assessed at the rate of 6% 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. The share of deceased
appellant No. 3 is to be equally distributed to the appellant
Nos. 1 and 2.
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 to the claimants'
bank accounts directly through RTGS / NEFT, in the
proportion decided by the Court below.
With the aforesaid directions the instant appeal is
disposed of.
In view of 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.)
