Gauhati High Court
Mustt. Momina Khatun vs Mrs. Saleha Begum And Anr on 24 February, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010010912020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MACApp./100/2020
MUSTT. MOMINA KHATUN
W/O LATE ABDUL HAMID MASTER, R/O DOBAKA, GOROIMARI RESERVE,
P.O. AND P.S.-DOBAKA, MAUZA-JAMUNAMUKH, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM,
PIN-782001
VERSUS
MRS. SALEHA BEGUM AND ANR.
W/O NUR MOHAMAD FAROOQUE, R/O AMINPATTY, CHOTOHAIBAR, P.O.
AND P.S.-NAGAON, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782001
2:NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
REPRESENTED BY THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
DIVISIONAL OFFICE
G S ROAD
GUWAHATI
KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM
PIN-78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : K U AHMED
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
JUDGMENT
Date : 24-02-2022
Heard Mr. Nur Mohammad, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
as well as Mr. K.U. Ahmed and Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsels representing the
respondents.
2. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the
Judgment and Award dated 29.08.2019 passed by the MACT, Sankardeve Nagar,
Hojai in MAC Case No. 237/2010.
3. The present appellant is aggrieved on 2(two) issues. The first is that the tribunal
while awarding compensation allowed an interest from the date of the judgment.
The second issue is that in view of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that
was rendered in National Insurance Com. Ltd. -vs- Pranay Sethi and Ors. Reported in
2017(4)TAC673(S.C.), the tribunal failed to award compensation towards loss of future
prospects.
4. The learned counsel Mr. Goswami submitted that so far as the question
regarding award of interest is concerned, the tribunal correctly directed that the
interest should be calculated from the date of the judgment. Mr. Goswami has
submitted that only for that acts of the appellant the delay took place in fact on
another occasion, prior to filing of the present appeal, the appellant had
approached this Court in the year 2017. That appeal was disposed of on 29.08.2019.
Mr. Goswami, therefore, submits that at this stage the insurance company should not
be penalized. According to Mr. Goswami, the claim case was filed in the year 2010
and if the insurance company directed to pay @ 6% from the year 2010, it will cause
loss of public money.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned
counsel for both sides.
6. At this stage paragraph 61(iii) of Pranay Sethi(supra) is relevant. It means as-
"61. In view of the aforesaid analysis we proceed to record our conclusion:
Page No.# 3/4
(iii)While determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual salary to
the income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased
had a permanent job and was below the age of 40 years, should be made.
The addition should be 30%, if the age of the deceased was between 40 to
50 years. In case the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the
addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary less."
7. The deceased was a government servant at the time of his death and his
monthly income is Rs.16,615/-. He was 48 years old at that time. The tribunal
calculated the compensation in the following manner:-
Loss of Income, Rs. 16,615 - 1/3=Rs.11,077.00 per month.
Rs. 11,077.00X12X13=Rs.17,28,012.00
Loss of consortium and funeral expenses Rs.70,000.00
Total..............................Rs.17,98,012.000
(Rupees Seventeen Lac, Ninety Eight Thousand and Twelve) only.
8. In view of Pranay Sethi's (supra) decision, the tribunal should have added 30%
of the actual income of the deceased towards future prospects. The calculation
made by the tribunal deserves to be modified to that effect.
9. If 30% of the income is added to the actual income of the deceased the
calculation shall be like this-
Yearly income Rs.1,99,380/- plus Rs.4992/-= Rs.2,04,372/-
1/3 is deducted on account of personal expenses.
Rs.1,36,248/-X13=Rs.17,71,224/-
Loss of consortium and funeral expenses Rs.70,000.00
The total compensation amount is Rs.18,41,224/-
10. So far as the interest part is concerned, this Court has decided to agree with the
submission made by the learned counsel Mr. Goswami. The claim was filed in the year
Page No.# 4/4
2010. The subsequent litigation before this Court ended in the month of August, 2019.
So for the time taken in litigations, the insurance company is not responsible because
the present appellant had approached this Court.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to agree with the appellant.
The interest upon the award shall be calculated from the date of the judgment.
12. The appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 21.10.2019 passed in MAC case
No.237/2010 stands modified accordingly.
13. The appellant shall be entitled to receive a compensation of Rs.18,41,224/-
(Rupees Eighteen Lac Forty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Four) only. The
compensation shall carry an interest @ 6% per annum to be calculated from
21.10.2019 till full payment.
Send back the LCR.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
