Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Chandra Sekhar Saha & Anr vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 8 November, 2021
08.11.2021
ss F.M.A.T. 536 of 2021
( Via Video Conference )
Chandra Sekhar Saha & anr.
Vs.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. & anr.
<,
Mr. Muktakesh Das ...For the Appellants/claimants
Mr. Rajesh Singh ... For the respondent no.1/insurance co.
<
Seen the office report dated October 4, 2021. Defect
is cured by granting leave to the learned Advocate for the
appellants to correct the preamble of the memorandum of
appeal by incorporating the correct date of the order and
judgement passed by the learned Court below.
The appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated September 29, 2020 passed by the Learned Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Islampur, Uttar
Dinajpur, in MAC Case No.27 of 2018 in a claim under
Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for the death of
one 'Kalpana Saha' in a vehicular accident dated April 6,
2017.
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 the victim as Rs.3,000/-,
considered by the learned Judge was inadequate.
Claimants also plead that the learned Tribunal erred in
not granting any amount under 'future prospect' of the
deceased. Accordingly, it was argued that a lesser
quantum of compensation has been wrongfully awarded
by the Tribunal.
Mr. Singh, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of
the insurance company submits that in the facts and
circumstances of the case, there is no further scope of
enhancement of the compensation amount.
Considering the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. -Vs.- Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC
121 and National Insurance Company Limited -Vs.-
Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680
and also following the precedence of this Court on the
point of monthly income, I find substance in the
argument of the appellants. For the year 2017, in a claim
under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an
amount of Rs.5,000/- per month does not appear to be
exorbitant. Claimants would also be entitled to 25%
future prospect on the income of the deceased.
Accordingly, the impugned award is modified and
recalculated in the manner referred hereinafter.
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Monthly Income Rs.5,000/-
Annual Income Rs.60,000/-
Less 1/3rd for personal expenses
(Rs.20,000/-) Rs.40,000/-
25% Future Prospect (Rs.10,000/-) Rs.50,000/-
Multiplier '14' Rs.7,00,000/-
Add 'General Damages' Rs.70,000/-
TOTAL Principal Compensation Rs.7,70,000/-
LESS - awarded by Tribunal and
paid by insurer Rs.4,06,000/-
BALANCE (enhancement) Rs.3,64,000/-
The claimants acknowledge receipt of the awarded
amount of Rs.4,06,000/- with interest as directed by the
Tribunal. Accordingly, the balance enhanced sum of
Rs.3,64,000/- 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 particulars of the
appellants. Advocate for the appellants will forward the
bank details of the said appellants within a fortnight from
date to Advocate for the insurance company. Payment is
to be made directly into the bank accounts of the
claimants through NEFT/ RTGS by the insurer.
The Tribunal Judge has granted liberty to the
insurer to recover the total compensation from the owner
of the vehicle. Such observation of Tribunal is not altered.
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.)
