Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smt. Purnima Nagwanshi
2022 Latest Caselaw 5939 Chatt

                                     -1-

                                                                       NAFR
              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                            MA(C) No.1018 of 2022

   1. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Through Its Legal Officer,
      Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, 301-302, Corporate
      House, 169 RNT Marg, Opposite Jhabua Tower, Indore, Madhya Pradesh.
      (Insurer).
                                                            ---Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
   1. Smt. Purnima Nagwanshi W/o Kamal Kumar Nagwanshi Aged About 43
      Years
   2. Virendra Bahadur Nagwanshi S/o Late Kamal Kumar Nagwanshi Aged
      About 23 Years
   3. Ku. Tumeshwari Nagwanshi D/o Late Kamal Kumar Nagwanshi Aged
      About 21 Years
      Respondents No. 1 to 3 are R/o Village Basladabri (Bhadrasi) Police

Station Komakhan, Tehsil Bagbahara (Claimants).

4. Chandrabhanu Indoj S/o Jaidev Indoj Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Temri Maal, Post Office Chindekela, Police Station Paikamaal (Driver), District : Bargarh *, Orissa.

5. Santosh Kumr Sahu S/o Balkrishna Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Haldi, Post Dumarpani Jonk, Police Station Khariyar Road (Owner), District : Nuapada *, Orissa.

Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Sourabh Sharma and Shri Shailesh Tiwari, Advocates.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

22.09.2022

1. The present is an appeal by the Insurance Company under Section 173 of

the Motor Vehicles Act. The challenge is to the award dated 30.06.2022

passed by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track

Court, Mahasamund in Claim Case No.H-34/2020. Vide the impugned

award, the Tribunal in a death case has awarded compensation to the

claimants to the tune of Rs.22,43,323/- with interest @ 7 percent per

annum from the date of application. The liability of payment of

compensation has been fastened upon the appellant-insurance company.

2. The appellant insurance company has questioned the quantum of

compensation through the present appeal. The primary contention of the

appellant is that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the

deceased at Rs.14,105/- per month whereas, the authorities ought to have

taken the notional income while granting the compensation. Similarly, the

counsel for the appellant also submits that the Tribunal has also wrongly

appreciated the granting of notional income while quantifying the

compensation.

3. Perusal of the records would show that the claimants infact had got a

witness examined from the office of the employer under whom the

deceased Kamal Kumar Nagwanshi was working. The evidence on the

part of the employer was that of Ram Singh Dhruw, AW-3 who has proved

a resolution Ex.P/72 from a Register maintained in the office of the

employer whereby it has been resolved that salary payable to the

deceased Kamal Kumar Nagwanshi was resolved to be Rs.14,105/- per

month. It was also established before the Tribunal that in the Bank Account

of the deceased it was reflected that an amount of Rs.14,105/- was

credited by the employer towards salary and for which the statement of the

Bank exhibited before the Tribunal was marked as Ex. P/73.

4. Given the aforesaid two facts by the employer, this court is of the opinion

that the grounds questioning the assessment of salary by the Tribunal

cannot be found fault with. The assessment of the 25 percent of his

monthly income towards future prospects also cannot be found fault with

and is strictly in accordance with the series of judgments laid down by the

Supreme Court right from the time of Sarla Verma & Others Vs. Delhi

Transport Corporation & Another, 2009(6)SCC 121 and National Insurance

Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others, 2017(16)SCC 680.

5. The appeal thus being devoid of merit deserves to be and is hereby

rejected.

sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder