Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Magma Hdi General Insurance Co. ... vs Baishakhi Ghosh & Ors on 15 September, 2021
15.09.2021
ss
F.M.A.T. 390 of 2021
I.A.. CAN 1 of 2021
I.A.. CAN 2 of 2021
( Via Video Conference )
Magma HDI General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Vs.
Baishakhi Ghosh & ors.
Ms. Gopa Das Mukherje
...For the Appellants/Insurance Co.
Mr. Jayanta Banerjee
... For the respondents/claimants
I.A. CAN 1 of 2021
This is an application for condonation of delay in
filing the instant appeal.
On perusal of the pleadings, this Court is satisfied
that the cause shown for delay in filing the instant appeal
is sufficient and the 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.
FMAT 390 of 2021
The instant appeal is directed against the
judgment and award dated March 18, 2021 passed by the
learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum
Additional District Judge, Diamond Harbour in MAC Case
No. 462 of 2017 for the death of a 34-year old namely
"Debdas Ghosh" in a road accident dated 31.05.2017.
The facts of the case are not in dispute.
The claim petition was filed under Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Various points have been
raised by the appellant/insurance company in the instant
appeal challenging the quantum of compensation.
Learned Advocate for the appellant/insurance
company submits that the learned tribunal wrongly
deducted 1/4th instead of 1/3rd from the assessed
compensation on account of personal expenses of the
deceased since total number of dependents on the income
of the deceased before his death was only three. She
further submits that erroneously Rs.1,50,000/- has been
granted by the learned Tribunal instead of Rs.70,000/-
on account of full component of 'general damages'. She
further submits that the learned Tribunal granted a
higher rate of interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded
compensation which may be taken as 6% per annum on
the awarded amount. It was argued that a higher
quantum of compensation has been wrongfully awarded
by the learned Tribunal.
Learned Advocate for the appellant/insurance
company submits that the claimants are entitled to get
compensation in view of the law as laid down in 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.
Per contra, learned Advocate for the respondents/
claimants argues that in the facts and circumstances of
the case, the award is just and reasonable and there is no
further scope of interference in the same.
Considering the above award passed by the learned
Tribunal , the impugned award is required to be modified
and reassessed in the following manner :
Particulars Amount
Monthly income Rs.6,500/-
Add : Future prospect 40% Rs.2,600/-
Rs.9,100/-
Annual Income (X12) Rs.1,09,200/-
Less : 1/3rd for personal expenses (-) Rs.36,400/-
Rs.72,800/-
Multiplier '16'
(Rs.72,800/- X 16) Rs.11,64,800/-
Add : General damages (+) Rs.70,000/-
Total compensation Rs.12,34,800/-
The principal compensation amount, that is,
Rs.12,34,800/- shall carry 6% interest per annum from
the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual
payment.
The entire compensation amount along with
interest shall be paid to the respondents/claimants by
the appellant/insurance company within 45 days from
the date of receipt of the particulars of the bank accounts
to be supplied by the learned Counsel for the claimants to
the learned Counsel for the insurance company. The
payment shall be made in the proportion decided by the
Court below.
The Registrar General of this Hon'ble Court is
directed to refund the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/-
along with interest to the appellant/insurance company
after payment is made to the claimants/respondents
through NEFT/RTGS.
With the aforesaid directions, the instant appeal is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
In view of 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.)
