Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sunanda Banerjee & Ors vs The New India Assurance Company on 22 September, 2021
12 22.9.2021 (Via Video Conference)
Sc
F.M.A. 578 OF 2021
--------------
Sunanda Banerjee & Ors.
-Vs.-
The New India Assurance Company
Limited & Anr.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy
...For the Appellants/
Claimants.
Mr. Rajesh Singh
...For the Respondent/
Insurance Company
The appeal is directed against the judgment and
award dated 29th August, 2020 passed by the learned
Additional District Judge cum Judge, Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, 1st Court, Asansol, Paschim Bardhaman
in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 92 of 2016 in a claim
under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the
death of one 42 years old 'Alok @ Aloke Banerjee', in an
accident dated June 14, 2016.
Mr. Roy, counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants/claimants has challenged the quantum of
compensation. He submitted that the monthly income of
Rs.10,000/- of the deceased as considered by the learned
Judge was inadequate and considering the evidence of
income of the deceased, minimum of Rs.13,000/- per
month should have been considered as the net salary of
the victim. It is also submitted by him that the tribunal
has erroneously not considered the 'future prospect' of
the deceased. Accordingly, it was argued that a lesser
quantum of compensation has been wrongfully awarded
by the tribunal.
Per contra, counsel representing the insurance
company argued that the award is just and reasonable
and there is no further scope of enhancement of the
same.
Considering the salary certificate, salary slips of
the deceased and deposition of P.W. - 2, I am of the view
that the monthly income of Rs.13,000/-, as prayed for
by the claimants can be considered for assessing the
compensation amount. However, in the facts of this
case, as the original employer of the deceased, 'Tara
Colliery' had closed down and the deceased was
receiving salary as per the direction of 'West Bengal
Mineral Development and Trading Corporation Limited',
the future prospect of 25% is considered for computation
of compensation. Counsel for the appellants/claimants
does not dispute that the appropriate multiplier in the
instant case should be '14' purchase factor.
Accordingly, following the principles of assessment
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases 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, the impugned
award is modified and recalculated in the manner
referred hereinafter :
Particulars Amount (Rs.)
Monthlyu Income Rs. 13,000/-
Annual Income Rs. 1,56,000/-
Add 25% future prospect
(Rs.39,000/-) Rs.1,95,000/-
Less 1/3rd for personal expenses
(Rs.65,000/-) Rs.1,30,000/-
Multiplier 14 Rs.18,20,000/-
Add General Damages Rs.70,000/-
Total Principal Compensation Rs.18,90,000/-
Less - awarded by tribunal and
Paid by the insurer Rs.12,70,000/-
Balance (enhancement) Rs.6,20,000/-
The appellants/claimants acknowledge receipt of
the awarded amount of Rs.12,70,000/- along with
interest in terms of the direction passed by the tribunal.
Accordingly, the balance enhanced sum of Rs.6,20,000/-
would become payable to the appellants by the insurance
company with interest assessed @6% per annum on and
from the date of filing of the claim application till the date
of payment, within a period of 45 days from the date of
receipt of the bank account particulars of the
appellants/claimants.
Counsel for the appellants/claimants shall forward
the bank accounts details of the appellants/claimants
within a fortnight from date to the counsel for the
insurance company. The payment shall be made in the
proportion as decided by the tribunal.
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 department
concerned is directed to tag the applications, if any, with
the main appeal.
There will be no 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.)
