Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Subhadip Tah vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors on 1 September, 2021
01.09.2021
ss
F.M.A. 573 of 2018
( Via Video Conference )
Subhadip Tah
Vs.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. & ors.
Mr. Ali Imam Shah
Sk. Abbas Uddin
...For the Appellant/claimant
Mr. Deb Narayan Ray
... For the respondent No.1/
National Insurance Co.
Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari
.... For the respondent No.2/
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
The appeal is directed against the judgment
and/or award dated 14.12.2016 passed by the learned
Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track 1st
Court, Bardhaman, in MAC Case No. 52/55 of 2013, on a
claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
for injury of one Subhadip Tah, the claimant herein, who
was injured in a Motor Vehicle accident occurred on
8.8.2012.
The claim was filed under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act.
Learned Advocate for the appellant/claimant
submits that the learned Tribunal committed error in law
while assessing the monthly income of the injured
person/claimant as Rs.3,500/- instead of Rs.4,000/-.
Learned Advocate for the appellant/claimant
further submits that the learned Tribunal committed
error in law while not granting 40% additional income
towards future prospect since the injured person,
Subhadip Tah, was 20 years old and he was 2nd year
B.A.(Hons) student working as self employed person. He
got 50% Disability Certificate from Burdwan Medical
College as evidence of P.W.3, Dr. Akhilesh Kumar.
In reply, Mr. Deb Narayan Ray, learned Advocate
for the respondent no.1/National Insurance Company
submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is
absolutely just and there is no scope of interference and/
or modification of the award.
Considering the judgements of Smt. Sarala Verma
& Ors. -Vs.- Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.,
reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance
Company Limited -Vs.- Pranay Sethi & Ors., reported
in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Syed Sadiq Vs. Divisional
Manager, United India Insurance, reported in 2014(1)
T.A.C. 396 (S.C.), I find substance on the submission of
the appellants. Since the accident occurred in 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. The appellant is entitled to get
40% additional amount towards future prospect of the
deceased.
Accordingly, the impugned award is required to be
modified in the following manner :
Particulars Amount
Monthly income Rs.4,000/-
Yearly income (X12) Rs.48,000/-
40% additional income towards
future prospect Rs.19,200/-
Total annual income (48,000+19,200) Rs.67,200/-
Deduction 50% (as per Disability
Certificate) Rs.33,600/-
Multiplier 18 (33,600 X 18) Rs.6,04,000/-
Medical expenditure Rs. 80,000/-
Pain & suffering
(taken by Ld. Tribunal) Rs.30,000/-
Total compensation Rs.7,14,800/-
Mr. Ali Imam Shah, learned Counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant/claimant acknowledges that his
client has already received the awarded amount of
Rs.4,46,000/-. According to him, the balance enhanced
sum of Rs.2,68,800/- would become payable to the
appellant by both the Insurance Companies together with
interest @ 6% per annum on and from the date of filing
the claim application till payment according to the award
of the learned Tribunal, that is, National Insurance
Company, being the respondent no.1 is liable to pay
80%,that is, Rs.2,15,040/- together with interest @ 6%
per annum from the date of filing the claim application till
payment and the Oriental Insurance Company is liable to
pay 20%, that is, Rs.53,760/- together with interest @ 6%
per annum from the date of filing the claim application till
payment within a period of 45 days from the date of
receipt of the bank account particulars of the appellant.
It is made clear that all the payments shall be made
through NEFT/RTGS to the bank accounts of the
appellant/claimant and for such purpose the learned
Advocate for the appellant/claimant shall furnish bank
accounts particulars of the appellant/claimant to the
learned advocates for both the Insurance Companies
within two weeks.
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
application, if any, is also disposed of.
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.)
