Jharkhand High Court
Mahesh Prasad Sinha vs Gajendra Kumar Das on 6 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 207 of 2018
......
1.Mahesh Prasad Sinha
2.Jitu Kumar Sinha
3.Pankaj Kumar Sinha ...... Appellants
Versus
1. Gajendra Kumar Das
2. M/s Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Dhanbad ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conferencing)
......
For the Appellants : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karn, Advocate
For the Respondent no.2 : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
-----
05/Dated: 06/04/2021.
Heard, learned counsel, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karn on the instruction of
learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. M.B. Lal.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that claimants
namely, 1.Mahesh Prasad Sinha, 2.Jitu Kumar Sinha and 3.Pankaj Kumar
Sinha have preferred this instant Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement
of the award dated 27.01.2018, passed by learned District Judge-VII- cum-
M.A.C.T. Judge, Dhanbad in Motor Accident Claims Cases No.56 of 2016,
whereby the claimants have been awarded compensation to the tune of
Rs.4,30,000/- [after deducting ad-interim compensation, if already paid]
along with simple interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim application i.e. 20.02.2016. The compensation amount must be paid
by defendant no.2 M/S Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Limited within 60
days of passing this award failing which penal interest @ 9% per annum
shall be levied after the expiry of aforesaid period of 60 days till its
realization.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that
respondent No.2-Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. has appeared
through his learned counsels, Mr. Alok Lal and Mr. Santosh Kumar
though no analogous appeal or cross-objection has been preferred by the
Insurance Company, as such, keeping the matter pending for appearance
of respondent no.1 [(Gajendra Kumar Das), owner of the motorcycle
bearing registration no.JH-10AD-9722] is not proper and the instant
appeal may be disposed of, in absence of the owner of the vehicle as the
vehicle is duly insured and the Insurance Company has not preferred any
appeal or cross-objection against the impugned award.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the
appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award, as
the learned Tribunal has not considered the future prospect of the
deceased (Baby Devi @ Sunita Sinha), who was travelling as a pillion rider
on the motorcycle bearing registration no.JH-10AD-9722 and lost her life
on 05.04.2014 at the age of 38 years. She was a teacher in Vidya Vikash
Bharti School and was earning Rs.3200/- per month, but in absence of any
chit of paper regarding the monthly salary of deceased, learned Tribunal
has considered the income of the deceased as Rs.3000/-per month , as
such, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680 at para 59.3, the claimants are entitled for 50% of monthly salary
as future prospect as the deceased died below the age of 40 years.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the
interest has been awarded @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim application i.e. 20.02.2016, which ought to have been 7.5% in view of
the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Dharampal & Sons
Vs. U.P. Transport Corporation, reported in 2008 (4), JCR 79 SC, as such,
interest may be enhanced.
Learned counsel for the respondent no.2, Mr. Alok Lal assisted by
learned counsel, Mr. Santosh Kumar has submitted that award has been
passed on 27.01.2018 and this appeal being an old matter, this Court may
not interfere with the same. The learned Tribunal has rightly considered
the deduction towards personal and individual expenses of the deceased
in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla
Verma (Smt) & others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another,
reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, para 30 and multiplier has rightly been done
by the learned Tribunal as deceased died at the age of 38 years in view of
the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt)
(Supra) para 42.
As such, the final computation of compensation considering the
income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month is as follows:-
Income Rs.3,000/- per month
Annual Income Rs.3,000/- x 12 = Rs.36,000 /-
50% Future Prospect Rs.36,000 /- + Rs.18,000/- = Rs.54,000/-
Pranay Sethi (Supra) para
59.3
1/3rd Deduction towards Rs.54,000/- minus (Rs.54,000/- x 1/3) =
personal and living expenses
Rs.36,000/-
as the dependents are 3 in
number
Sarla Verma (Supra) para 30
Multiplier of 15 (as the Rs.36,000/- x 15 = Rs.5,40,000/-.
deceased was in the age group
of 36-40 years) Sarla Verma
(Supra) para 42
Conventional Head Rs.70,000/-
Pranay Sethi (Supra) para
59.8
Total Compensation Amount Rs.5,40,000/- + Rs.70,000/- = Rs.6,10,000/-
As such, the total compensation amount of Rs.6,10,000/- shall be paid
along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application i.e. 20.02.2016 till the date of realization. The amount already
indemnified by the Insurance Company under Section 140 of the MV Act
to the tune of Rs.50,000/- shall be deducted and amount paid, if any, by
the Insurance Company pursuant to the impugned award shall also be
deducted and the balance amount shall be paid by the Insurance
Company within a reasonable time as the accident is of dated 05.04.2014.
Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal is hereby allowed.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
R.S.
