Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Raimuni Sahu @ Sah & Ors vs Smt. Amita Sahoo on 13 January, 2023
03
13.01.2023
Ct. No.237
pg.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
FMA 229 of 2004
Smt. Raimuni Sahu @ Sah & Ors.
Vs.
Smt. Amita Sahoo
Mr. Sanajit Kumar Ghosh
Mr. Bodhisatta Basu
... For the appellants/claimants
Mr. Rajesh Singh
... For the respondent no.2/Insurance Co.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and
order passed on 11th September, 2003 by the learned
Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 4th Court,
Midnapore, in connection with MAC Case No.346 of 2002
under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The claim petition was filed on account of death of
one Sanatan Sahu @ Saha in a motor accident occurred
on 12th March, 2002 at about 5.30 a.m., while the
deceased was standing at Kalaikunda Gate No.2 and
waiting for public bus. At the time one Trekker, bearing
registration no.WB-33/6170, coming from Jhargram side
with high speed and in rash and negligent manner pressed
its sudden break and turned upside down, causing injury
to the deceased. He was taken to hospital where he
succumbed to his injuries. At the relevant point of time,
the victim was an employee of Tata Iron and Steel
Company Limited, Jamshedpur, Bihar, having monthly
2
income of Rs.7,000/-. That is why the claim petition was
filed with a prayer for compensation to the tune of
Rs.8,00,000/-.
Owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the
claim petition but the Oriental Insurance Company
Limited contested the case by filing written statement
denying all material averments in the claim petition.
To prove the case, appellants/claimants examined
two witnesses, namely, Smt. Raimuni Sahu @ Sah, wife of
the deceased, as PW-1, who corroborated the entire facts
of the claim petition. One Ashwini Ghosh was examined as
PW-2 who claimed himself to be an eyewitness of the
accident. He testified that on 12th March, 2002 he was also
standing at the bus stoppage to avail the bus and one
Trekker, bearing registration no.WB-33/6170, coming with
high speed, suddenly overturned upon the victim who was
sitting there. He along with others rescued the victim and
removed to Sadar Hospital where he succumbed to his
injuries.
Some documents were filed, including copy of the
First Information Report, seizure list, charge sheet, post-
mortem report, inquest report etc. but those documents
were not admitted in evidence by the learned Tribunal.
However, certified copy of FIR, charge sheet, seizure list
and post-mortem report, being public documents, I can
consider those documents in support of the accident
alleged in this case.
3
Considering the evidence of PW-2 together with the
documents, viz., FIR, charge sheet, seizure list and post-
mortem report, I find that Sanatan Sahu @ Saha died in
motor accident by the involvement of a Trekker, bearing
registration no.WB-33/6170, which was driving rashly and
the said Trekker was duly insured with the Oriental
Insurance Company Limited.
Now, I come to the issue of income of the deceased.
According to the claim petition, the deceased was an
employee of Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited and
some documents of Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited
were filed but those documents were not proved. Learned
Tribunal took those documents into consideration in
support of the employment of the deceased. From the
record, I do not find any authorised person of Tata Iron
and Steel Company Limited to be examined in this case for
proving all those documents of Tata Iron and Steel
Company Limited. Therefore, I am unable to come to any
decision in this regard.
Learned Tribunal took the contradictory
statements of PW-1 and returned its finding that the
claimants failed to prove the income of the deceased.
However, the learned Tribunal took the notional income of
Rs.15,000/- per annum. But, considering the price index
and other matters, I am of the humble opinion that
notional income of the deceased should be assessed at
Rs.3,000/- per month.
4
Accordingly, I determine he compensation as
follows:-
Monthly Income Rs. 3,000/-
Annual Income (Rs.3,000/- x 12) Rs. 36,000/-
Add: Future prospect (@ 25%) Rs. 9,000/-
-------------------
Rs. 45,000/-
Less: 1/3rd Deduction (personal expenses) Rs. 15,000/-
-------------------
Rs. 30,000/-
Multiplier by 14 (as per age of the victim) x 14
Rs.4,20,000/-
Add: General Damages Rs. 70,000/-
Total Rs.4,90,000/-
Less - Awarded by ld. Tribunal Rs.1,34,500/-
ENHANCEMENT Rs.3,55,500/-
For the reasons, it is seen that the
appellants/claimants are entitled to the total
compensation to the tune of Rs.4,90,000/- along with
interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim petition, i.e. on 20th April, 2002 till the deposit of the
amount.
It is reported that the appellants/claimants have
already received Rs.1,34,500/- as awarded by the learned
Tribunal.
Therefore, the appellants/claimants are entitled to
the balance amount of Rs.3,55,500/- along with interest @
6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition,
i.e., on 20th April, 2002 till the deposit of the amount.
Accordingly, the respondent no.2/Oriental
Insurance Company Limited is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount of Rs.3,55,500/- along with interest @
6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition,
i.e. on 20th April, 2002 till the actual deposit of the amount
before the office of the learned Registrar General of this
Court, within six weeks from the date of this order.
The appellants/claimants are entitled to withdraw
the balance award amount with interest.
The learned Registrar General is requested to
disburse the amount to the appellant/claimant no.1, Smt.
Raimuni Sahu @ Sah, on proper identification.
With the above observation, the appeal, being FMA
229 of 2004, is disposed of on merit.
All pending applications, if there be any, stand
disposed of.
Records of the learned Tribunal along with a copy
of this order be transmitted back immediately.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of
necessary formalities.
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
