Chattisgarh High Court

Branch Manager United India Insurance ... vs Smt. Deshir Bai Yadav on 7 May, 2025

                                     1

                         Digitally signed by
                         SHUBHAM SINGH
                         RAGHUVANSHI
                         Date: 2025.05.09
                         17:34:14 +0530



                                                 2025:CGHC:21013
                                                               NAFR

      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                      MAC No. 1729 of 2017

Branch Manager United India Insurance Company Limited
Bathena Chowk Sinhna Complex Raipur Road, Dhamtari, Post
Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (Insurer)
                                                          --- Appellant
                                versus
1 - Smt. Deshir Bai Yadav W/o Ganeshram, Aged About 54
Years R/o Subhash Nagar Ward Kanta Talab, Near Water Tank
Hatkeshar, Pot, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh


2 - Narendra Yadav S/o Ganeshram Yadav, Aged About 23
Years R/o Subhash Nagar Ward Kanta Talab, Near Water Tank
Hatkeshar,     Pot,     Tahsil           And   District      Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh(Claimants)


3 - Falesh Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Santram Sahu, Aged About 32
Years R/o Village Post Tarsiwa, Tahsil And District Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh (Owner cum Driver)
                                                   --- Respondent(s)

1 - Smt. Deshir Bai Yadav W/o Ganeshram Aged About 54 Years R/o Subhash Nagar Ward Kanta Talab, Nearby Water Tank, Hatkeshwar, Post, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2 - Narendra Yadav S/o Late Ganeshram Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o Subhash Nagar Ward Kanta Talab, Nearby Water

Tank, Hatkeshwar, Post, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (Claimants)

---Appellants Versus 1 - Falesh Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Santram Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Village And Post Tarsiwa, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (Owner cum Driver)

2 - Branch Manager United India Insurance Company Limited, Bathena Chowk, Sinha Complex, Raipur Road, Dhamtari, Post Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (Insurer)

--- Respondent(s) For Insurer : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For Claimants : Ms. Devanshi Chakraborty, Advocate on behalf of Mr. HAPS Bhatia, Advocate For Owner cum Driver : None

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal (Order on Board) (07.05.2025)

1. Since both the appeals arise out of same award dated

11.09.2017, passed by learned Additional Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (C.G.), in Claim Case No.91/2016,

therefore, they are being heard and decided by this common

order.

2. The gist of the claims before the Tribunal, in brief, was that

on 12.08.2015 at around 7 AM, Dwarika Yadav (now deceased)

was going from Mujgahan to Hatkeshwar by foot, at that time

driver cum owner of offending vehicle (motorcycle Bajaj Platina)

bearing registration No. CG-05-N-5904, drove the offending

vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed Dwarika due

to which Dwarika sustained grievous injuries on his head and

died during treatment in a hospital. The incident was reported

at concerned Police Station based on which a criminal case was

registered.

3. It is claimed that at the time of accident, deceased Dwarika

was aged about 30 years and he was unmarried. He was a

labour and was earning Rs. 9,000/- monthly. Due to the casual

death of Dwarika, there is an irreparable loss to his legal

representatives, therefore, the legal representatives of Dwarika

had preferred an application before the Claims Tribunal

claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 15,64,000/-.

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

brought on record, assessed monthly income of the deceased to

Rs.3,000/-, deducted 1/3 income towards personal and living

expenses and applied multiplier of 17 and given Rs.30,000/- in

other heads. Thus, total Rs.4,38,000/- has been awarded by the

Claims Tribunal in favour of legal representatives of Dwarika

with interest @ 6 % per annum, from the date of application till

its realization and fastened the liability upon Insurance

Company. Hence, MAC No. 1729/2017 has been filed by the

Insurance Company for reduction of the compensation and MAC

No.441/2018 has been filed by the claimants for enhancement

of the compensation.

(MAC NO.1729/2017)

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company

argues only in quantum part. She submits that the deceased

was unmarried, the deductions towards personal and living

expenses would be 1/2 which has not been considered by the

Claims Tribunal, therefore, the amount of compensation may be

recomputed and it may be reduced suitably.

6. None appeared on behalf of Owner cum Driver/Respondent

No.3.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for

Claimants/Respondents No.1 & 2 opposes the argument

advanced by learned Counsel appearing for the insurance

company.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side

and needs to be enhanced suitably. The learned counsel urged

that the Tribunal erred in not assessing the proper monthly

income of the deceased. She further submits that the Tribunal

has not given future prospect. The Tribunal has also awarded

lesser amount on other heads, therefore, this appeal may be

allowed and amount of compensation may be enhanced

suitably.

9. None appeared on behalf of Owner cum Driver/Respondent

No.1.

10. On the other hand learned Counsels appearing for

Insurance Company/Respondent No.2 opposes the argument

advanced by learned Counsel appearing for the

appellants/claimants.

11. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the

compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and

proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the

case.

12. As regards the income of the deceased, though the

claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning

Rs.300/day i.e. 9,000/-. per month from his work, but no

documentary evidence in support thereof has been produced,

but it cannot be said that the deceased was not earning

anything from his work. Therefore, in absence of any reliable

evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the

notification by Labour Department for minimum wages, I find it

appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 5,787/- per

month as minimum wages, at the relevant time of accident i.e.

12.08.2015. The annual income comes to Rs. 69,444/- per

annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay

Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the age of the deceased

has been found to be 30 years, after adding 40% towards future

prospects i.e. Rs. 27,777/-, the annual income comes to Rs.

97,221/- (69444+27777).

13. The deceased was aged about 30 years and was unmarried

and the claimants (total 2) are mother & brother of the deceased

so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/2 which

dependency comes to Rs. 48,610.5/-(97221-48610.5). 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 17, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.

8,26,378/-. 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 for loss of love and affection. Therefore,

the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of

Rs. 09,36,378/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for

compensation in the following manner:-

S.No.                 Heads                   Calculation

  01    Towards loss of dependency                 Rs. 8,26,378/-
  02    Towards loss of estate                      Rs. 15,000/-
  03    Towards love and affection to               Rs. 80,000/-
        each claimants @ Rs.
        40,000/- (40000 x 2)
  04    Funeral Expenses                            Rs. 15,000/-
                      Total                    Rs. 9,36,378/-

14. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs.

9,36,378/-. After deducting Rs. 4,38,000/- as awarded by the

Tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 4,98,378/-.

15. Accordingly, the claimants shall be entitled to get

Rs.4,98,378/- in addition to what is already awarded by the

Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6%

from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization.

The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and

rest of the conditions shall remain intact.

16. In the result :-