Chattisgarh High Court

Divisional Manager National Insurance ... vs Smt. Rukhmani Chanap on 11 April, 2025

                                    1

                        Digitally signed by
                        SHUBHAM SINGH
                        RAGHUVANSHI
                        Date: 2025.04.17
                        10:50:48 +0530



                                                     2025:CGHC:16986
                                                                NAFR

         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                       MAC No. 652 of 2019

Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd., Registered
Office 3 Middleton Street Post Box No. 9229 Kotkata (W.B.),
Division Office Above Karnataka Bank Near Ujala Bhawan Durg
Police   Station    Mohan    Nagar      Tahsil   And     District   Durg
Chhattisgarh
                                                          ... Appellant
                                versus
1 - Smt. Rukhmani Chanap Wd/o Late Narendra Kumar Aged
About 42 Years R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara
District Balod Chhattisgarh
2 - Miss Divya D/o Late Narendra Kumar Aged About 21 Years
R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara District Balod
Chhattisgarh
3 - Miss Preeti D/o Late Narendra Kumar Aged About 20 Years
R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara District Balod
Chhattisgarh
4 - Miss Sandhya D/o Late Narendra Kumar Aged About 16
Years    Minor,    Through   Natural      Guardian     Smt.   Rukhmani
Chanap (Mother ) R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara
District Balod Chhattisgarh
5 - Nikhil Kumar S/o Late Narendra Kumar Aged About 15 Years
Minor, Through Natural Guardian Smt. Rukhmani Chanap
(Mother ) R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara District
Balod Chhattisgarh
                                      2

6 - Praduman S/o Sukhuram Chanap Aged About 70 Years R/o
Village   Reewagahan       Tahsil    Dondi    Lohara      District   Balod
Chhattisgarh
7 - Smt. Dhelabai W/o Praduman Chanap Aged About 65 Years
R/o Village Reewagahan Tahsil Dondi Lohara District Balod
Chhattisgarh................(Respondents No.1 to 7 are Claimants)

8 - Baliram Markam S/o Chaituram Markam R/o Village Kamta Tahsil And District Dondilohara District Balod Chhattisgarh................................................................(Driver) 9 - M/s. Amar Infrastructure Ltd., Through Manager At Mahesh Nagar Jainam Palace Near Poolgaon Nala G.E. Road Durg Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh.....................................(Owner) ......Respondents For Appellant : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 3 & 5 : Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate For Respondents No.4, 6 to 9 : None

(Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)

Order on Board

11/04/2025

1. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company

under Section 173 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

challenging the award dated 27.11.2018 passed by Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal Durg (C.G.) in Claim Case

No.321/2017, whereby the Tribunal has awarded

compensation of Rs.55,69,538/- with interest @ 6% per

annum, from the date of application till its realization, in

favour of Respondents No.1 to 7/claimants for their

irreparable loss.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of this appeal, in brief, are

that on 01.06.2017, Narendra Kumar Chanap (now

deceased) was going on his motorcycle to his village

Reewagahan and when he reached near Keshariya Pond,

Jatadah, driver/respondent No. 8 of offending vehicle (Hywa

Truck) bearing registration No. CG-07-BB-0351 drove the

vehicle in rash and negligent manner and dashed the

motorcycle of Narendra, due to which Narendra sustained

grievous injuries and died on spot. A report of the incident

was lodged, based on which offence was registered.

3. It was claimed that on the date of the accident, age of the

deceased was about 51 years, he was a public servant

(Headmaster) and was earning Rs. 47,452/- per month from

his government job. Due to the casual death of the deceased,

there is an irreparable loss to the Respondents No.1 to

7/claimants. Therefore, the claimants have claimed

Rs.91,93,664 as compensation on various heads.

4. Learned Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence

brought on record, estimated the age of the deceased to be

51 years, assessed monthly income of the deceased to

Rs.45,286, given 15% future prospects, deducted 1/5

income towards personal and living expenses and applied

multiplier of 11 and awarded Rs. 54,99,538/-. Furthermore,

Rs.70,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal in other

heads. Thus, total Rs.55,69,538/- has been awarded in

favour of Respondents No.1 to 7/claimants with interest @

6% per annum, from the date of application till its

realization, in which, the Insurance Company, has been held

liable for payment of compensation. Hence, this appeal has

been preferred by the Insurance Company challenging the

impugned award.

5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company challenged the

quantum part in this appeal. The argument of learned

Counsel is that the income of deceased Narendra Kumar

Chanap has been overestimated by the Claims Tribunal. He

further argued that a request was made by the insurance

company before the Claims Tribunal for production of the

deceased's Form 16 and income tax return, however, the

Tribunal declined to entertain the said request. He further

submits that the Claims Tribunal has awarded the

compensation in favour of two major daughter by finding

them unmarried which is also not justified. Hence, it is

prayed that the amount of compensation may be reduced

suitably.

6. None appeared on behalf of Respondents No.4, 6 to 9.

7. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 & 5 submits that

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower

side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits

that the learned Claims Tribunal has also awarded lesser

amount in other heads, therefore, amount of compensation

may be enhanced suitably. He also submits that the appeal

of the insurance company may be dismissed.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

9. As far as the income of the deceased Narendra Kumar

Chanap aged about 51 years is concerned, in this regard,

the claimant is said to be the Headmaster in primary school

village Hitapathar under the 'Tribal Development

Department, Government of Chhattisgarh'. As per the

statements of wife of the deceased Smt. Rukhmani (AW-1),

Assistant Grade-III, Office of the Assistant Commissioner,

Tribal Development Department, Balod O.P. Mandavi (AW-3),

the salary slip of the deceased for the month of April 2017

(Ex.P-18) and the salary slip of the deceased for the month

of May 2017 (Ex.P-15), shows gross salary of the deceased to

be Rs.47,452/-. On the basis of above evidence, the Tribunal

has also held the monthly income of the deceased to

Rs.45,286/- and calculated his annual income to Rs.

5,43,432/-. There is no reason shown to disbelieve the above

evidence. The above finding of the Tribunal is not found to

be contrary or perverse to the facts and evidence available

on record. Therefore, the argument of the

appellant/insurance company that the annual income of the

deceased has been overestimated is not found to be

acceptable. Furthermore, though Respondents No.2 &

3/claimants are major daughters of the deceased, but, they

are unmarried, therefore, the Claims Tribunal was justified

in giving compensation in favour of the unmarried daughters

of the deceased.

10. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the

compensation of Rs.55,69,538/- awarded by the Tribunal is

just and proper compensation in the given facts and

circumstances of the case?

11. As regards the income of the deceased, as discussed above,

the Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly

income of the deceased as Rs. 45,286/-. The annual income

comes to Rs. 5,43,432/- per annum. As per National

Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others,

(2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 15% towards future

prospects i.e. Rs. 81,514/-, the annual income comes to

Rs.6,24,946/-.

12. From the annual income of the deceased, there will be

statutory deduction towards income tax. The income tax

slab for the financial year 2017-2018 was as follows:

Income Tax Slabs Income Taxable Total Tax in the FY 2017- Tax Rates Income

0 to 2.5 Lakh nil nil nil 2.5 lakh to 5 lakh 5% Rs.2,50,000/- Rs. 12,500/-

      5 lakh to 10 lakh       20%          Rs.1,24,946        Rs. 24,989
                                            Total             Rs.37,489/-

13. In view of the same, after deduction of income tax, the

annual income comes to Rs.5,87,457 (624946-37489).

14. The deceased was aged about 51 years and the claimants

(total 7) are the wife, children and mother-father of the

deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be

1/5 i.e. Rs.1,17,491/- which dependency comes to Rs.

4,69,966/- (587457 -117491). In view of judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others

vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in

(2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd.,

Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680

considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier

of 11, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.

51,69,626/- (469966 x 11). The claimants are further

entitled to get Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate, Rs. 15,000/-

for funeral expenses and as per 'Magma General Insurance

Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189,

they are further entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- each (2,80,000)