Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Beena Podder vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & ... on 24 September, 2021
24.09.2021
ss F.M.A. 584 of 2018
I.A. CAN 1 of 2021
( Via Video Conference )
Beena Podder
Vs.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & anr.
Mr. Saidur Rahaman
...For the Appellants/claimants
Mr. Sanjay Paul
... For the respondent No.1/Insurance Co.
The instant appeal is directed against the
judgment and award dated December 5, 2016 passed by
the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 4th
Court, Malda in MAC Case No. 71 of 2016 praying for
compensation for death of Sourav Kumar Podder in a
road traffic accident under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act.
The facts of the case are not in dispute.
Mr. Rahaman, learned Advocate for the
appellants/claimants submit that the learned Tribunal
committed error in law while not assessing the monthly
income of the deceased as Rs.5,000/- instead of
Rs.3,000/- on the basis of uncontroverted oral evidence
as adduced by the mother of the deceased.
Mr. Rahaman further submits that the learned
Tribunal committed error in law while not granting 40%
additional income towards future prospect since the
deceased was 20 years old self-employed person. Learned
tribunal also committed error in law while adopting
multiplier 16 but fact remains that as per post mortem
report the deceased was 20 years old and as per schedule
appended in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & ors. Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & anr., reported in (2009)
6 SCC 121, the appropriate multiplier is 18.
Mr. Rahaman further submits that the learned
Tribunal ought to have granted Rs.30,000/- instead of
Rs.4,500/- towards general damages.
Mr. Paul, learned Counsel appearing for the
insurance company submits that the learned Tribunal
committed error in law while deducting 1/3rd instead of
50% from the income of the deceased towards personal
expenses as the deceased was a bachelor.
Considering the judgement 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 and also following the precedence of this Court on
the point of monthly income, I find substance in the
arguments of the appellants. Since the accident occurred
in the year 2015, 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. The appellants
are justified in praying for 40% addition on account of
'future prospect' on the income of the deceased since the
victim was 20 years old as per post mortem report and
self-employed person. Since the deceased was bachelor,
deduction shall be 50% towards personal expenses of the
deceased and general damages shall be Rs.30,000/-.
Considering the ratio as decided in the case of
Sarla Verma (supra) and Pranay Sethi (supra), the
impugned award passed by the tribunal is modified and
recalculated in the manner referred hereinafter :
Particulars Amount
Monthly income Rs.5,000/-
Add : Future Prospect 40% Rs.2,000/-
Rs.7,000/-
Annual income X12 Rs.84,000/-
Less : 50% for personal expenses Rs.42,000/-
Annual loss of dependency Rs.42,000/-
Multiplier '18' Rs.7,56,000/-
Add : General damages Rs.30,000/-
Rs.7,86,000/-
Less:Awarded amount already paid Rs.3,88,500/-
Enhanced principal amount Rs.3,97,500/-
The claimants acknowledge receipt of the awarded
amount of Rs.3,88,500/- in terms of direction of the
learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the balance enhanced
sum of Rs.3,97,500/- would become payable to the
appellants/claimants by the insurance company together
with interest @ 6% p.a. on and from the date of filing of
the claim petition till actual payment within a period of
45 days from the date of receipt of the bank account
particulars of the claimants.
Mr. Rahaman, learned Advocate for the
appellants/claimants submits that his clients have
received only awarded sum of Rs.3,88,500/- but no
amount towards interest was deposited by the insurance
company.
In reply, Mr. Paul, learned Advocate appearing for
the insurance company submits that he has no
instruction regarding non-deposit of interest as granted
by the learned Tribunal.
Be that as it may, the insurance company is
directed to pay interest @ 6% per annum on the awarded
sum of Rs.3,88,500/- from the date of claim application
till date of deposit of such amount before the tribunal, if
not paid earlier.
It is made clear that the payment shall be made by
NEFT/RTGS in the same manner and proportion as per
award.
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.
L.C.R., if any, be returned back to the court below
forthwith.
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.)
