Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Smt. Gita Gorai & Ors on 25 September, 2023
25.09.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ct. no.654 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Sl. No.176 APPELLATE SIDE
Sn/ab ,,
F.M.A. 405 of 2017
(CAN 3 of 2023)
United India Insurance Co.Ltd.
Vs.
Smt. Gita Gorai & Ors.
,,
Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari
... For the appellant-insurance Co.
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mondal
... For the respondents-claimants
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and
award dated 20th May, 2016 passed by learned Additional
District Judge cum Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, 2nd Court, Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman in
M.A.C. Case no. 61 of 2013 granting compensation of
Rs.40,09,000/- together with interest in favour of the
claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988.
The brief fact of the case is that on 8th April, 2013,
at about 7-30 p.m. while the victim was proceeding
towards Ukhra to join his duties at ECL by motor cycle
and when he reached between Kalipur and Madhaiganj
the offending vehicle bearing registration no.WB-
19B/8143 (tanker) dashed the victim from behind in a
rash and negligent manner, as a result of which the victim
sustained severe multiple injuries and was immediately
taken to SD Hospital, Durgpur where he was declared
dead by the attending doctor. On account of sudden
demise of the victim, the claimants being the widow, son
and daughter filed application for compensation of
Rs.38,22,544/- together with interest under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The claimants in order to establish their case
examined three witnesses and produced documents,
which have been marked as Exhibit 1 to 12/1
respectively.
Appellant-insurance company did not adduce any
evidence.
By order dated 4th September, 2023, service of notice
of appeal upon respondent no. 4, owner of the offending
vehicle has been dispensed with since he did not contest
the claim application.
Upon considering the materials on record and the
evidence adduced on behalf of the claimants, the learned
Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.40,09,000/- together
with interest in favour of claimant nos. 1 & 3 under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award of the learned Tribunal,
the appellant-insurance company has preferred the
present appeal.
Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari, learned advocate for the
appellant-insurance company submits that the learned
Tribunal erred in granting Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of
consortium and Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss compassion
for suffering mental pain and agony and Rs.25,000/-
towards future funeral expenses which should be
restricted to Rs.70,000/- under the conventional heads in
view of the decision of National Insurance Company
Limited versus Pranay Sethi and Others reported in
(2017) 16 SCC 680. He further submits that the rate of
interest on compensation needs to be scaled down from
8% per annum in view of the prevailing banking rate of
interest. In the light of his aforesaid submissions, he prays
for modification of the impugned judgment and award of
the learned Tribunal.
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mondal, learned advocate for
the respondent nos. 1 to 3-claimants leaves the matter to
the discretion of the Court.
Having heard the learned advocates for the
respective parties, following issues have fallen for
consideration. Firstly, whether the learned Tribunal erred
in granting compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss
of consortium, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of compassion
for suffering pain and agony and Rs. 25,000/- towards
future funeral expenses and secondly, whether the rate of
interest on compensation should be scaled down from 8%
per annum granted by learned Tribunal.
With regard to the first issue relating to grant of
compensation under general damages, it is found that the
learned Tribunal has granted Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss
of consortium, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of
compassion for suffering pain and agony and Rs.25,000/-
towards future funeral expenses. However, following the
observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants are entitled to general
damages under the conventional head of loss of estate,
loss of consortium and funeral expenses of Rs. 15,000/-,
Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. Since three
years have already elapsed, there shall be escalation of
10% on the amount under general damages.
With regard to the second issue relating to interest
on compensation, it is found that the learned Tribunal
has granted interest @ 8% per annum on the
compensation amount. However, bearing in mind the
prevailing banking rate of interest, the compensation
amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum.
The other factors have not been challenged in this
appeal.
Bearing in mind the above factors, calculation is
made hereunder:
Calculation of Compensation
Monthly income Rs.43,000/-
Annual income Rs.5,16,000/-
(Rs.43,000/- x 12)
Less: 1/3rd towards personal Rs.1,72,000/-
and living expenses
Rs.3,44,000/-
Multiplier 11 Rs.37,84,000/-
(Rs.3,44,000/- x 11)
Add: General damages Rs.70,000/-
Loss of estate: Rs.15,000/-
Loss of consortium: Rs.40,000/-
Funeral expenses: Rs.15,000/-
Add: 10% escalation on Rs.7,000/-
general damages
Total compensation Rs.38,61,000/-
Thus, the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.
38,61,000/- together with interest @ 6% per annum from
the date of filing of claim application till payment.
It is found that the appellant-insurance company
has deposited a sum of Rs. 51,54,410/- vide OD Challan
No. 2718 dated 4th January, 2017 and an amount of
Rs.25,000/- towards statutory deposit vide OD Challan
No. 1547 dated 8th September, 2016. Both the aforesaid
deposits together with accrued interest be adjusted against
the entire compensation amount and interest thereon.
Learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta shall
release the aforesaid compensation amount and the interest
as indicated herein above, in favour of the respondent nos.
1 and 3, after making payment of Rs. 44,000/- in favour of
the respondent no. 1, widow of the deceased towards
spousal consortium, in proportions that the respondent no.
1 shall receive 60% and respondent no. 3 shall receive 40%
of the compensation amount respectively, upon satisfaction
of their identity.
Upon satisfaction of the entire compensation amount,
if any amount is left over, the same shall be refunded to the
Insurance Company.
With the aforesaid observations, the appeal stands
disposed of. The impugned judgement and award of the
learned Tribunal is modified to the above extent. No order
as to costs.
All the connected applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Urgent photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be
given to the parties upon compliance of necessary legal
formalities.
< (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)
