Haripriya Mondal & Ors vs The M.D. Nbstc
2023 Latest Caselaw 5924 Cal

05.09. 2023 item No.15 n.b.

ct. no. 551                 FMA 2542 of 2013


     Haripriya Mondal & Ors.
     Vs.
                 The M.D. NBSTC, Cooch-Bihar.

              Ms. Sima Ghosh,
              Ms. Sabina Khatun,
                               .....for the appellant
              Mr. Sanjoy Paul,
                               .....for the NBSTC.

The instant appeal has been preferred against the

judgment and award dated April 22, 2013 passed by the

learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 5 th Court,

Berhampore, Murshidabadin M.A. C. case No. 403 of

2006.

The brief fact of the case is that the present

appellant being the claimants preferred an application

before the learned Tribunal under Section 166 of the the

M.V. Act for getting compensation from the Insurance

Company on the ground that the son of the appellant no.1

was died in the road traffic accident due to rash and

negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle duly

insured under the policy of the Insurance Company.

The matter was contested by the Insurance

Company before the learned Tribunal. The learned

Tribunal after hearing both the parties has awarded sum

of Rs.1,64,500/- along with 4 per cent interest per annum

in favour of the claimants.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

impugned award, the present appellant has preferred this

appeal.

Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that

the income of the deceased was taken to be Rs.15,000/-

per month notionally which is erroneous. The deceased

was the student of class XI. He used to give tuition in his

house and used to earn Rs.3000/- per month. The

evidences were there by virtue of P.W. 1 and PW. 2 to that

effect. Thus, in this case the tribunal must have awarded

the compensation fixing the monthly income of the

deceased to be Rs.3,000/- per month. He also argued

that the multiplier adopted by the learned Tribunal is

erroneous. She further argued that the 4% interest was

only given instead of which the 6% interest may be given.

Leaned advocate appearing on behalf of the

Managing Director NBSTC submits that the impugned

award passed by the learned Tribunal suffers no illegality.

There are not sufficient document to prove the income of

the deceased. Thus, the income of the deceased was

calculated to be Rs.15,000/- per annum correctly.

He again argued that in considering the multiplier

in his case the co-ordinate Bench of this curt in FMA 197

of 2019 has placed reliance upon the schedule mentioned

in para 40 of Sarala Verma. According to such schedule,

the applicable multiplier for the person aged about 15 to

20 years would be 19.

Heard the learned advocate. Perused the materials

on record and also perused the evidences placed before

the learned Tribunal, it was mentioned in the claim

application that the deceased was student of class XI and

he used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month from the

occupation of his tuition. No evidence regarding any

student received tuition or any guardian of student

appeared before the learned Tribunal to substantiate the

factum. Only one of the claimant has stated the fact as

mentioned in the claim application. By corroborating the

fact mentioned in the claim application regarding the

income, ipso facto cannot prove income of a deceased. In

this particular nature of case, the schedule mentioned in

163A of the M.V. Act has to be followed strictly. Thus, I

find no infirmity for determination of income of

Rs.15,000/- per annum by the learned Tribunal.

Considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court

passed in Sarala Verma, the claimant is entitled to get the

compensation adopting the multiplier of 19; considering

the age of the claimant within 15 to 20 years.

For just and proper compensation of this case, the

award by the learned Tribunal is hereby modified. The

yearly income is Rs.15,000/- less 1/3rd i.e. Rs.5000/-. The

yearly income comes to Rs.10,000/-, applicable multiplier

19. So, after applying the multiplier, the award comes to

Rs.1,90,000/-the claimants are entitled to get the general

damages amounting to Rs.4,500. So the award come to

Rs.1,94,500/-.

Insurance Company is directed to pay the above

mentioned award amount to the claimant through the

office of Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta along

with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the

claim application i.e. from August 21, 2006 within eight

weeks from the date of passing of the order. On such

deposit, the appellant no.2 shall receive the entire

compensation amount according to the prelevant rules.

Accordingly, 2542 of 2013 is disposed of.

Connected applications, if any, are also disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Subhendu Samanta, J.)