Jharkhand High Court
Basudev Pandit vs Vijay Kumar Modi on 7 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
[Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction]
M.A. No. 643 of 2018
1.Basudev Pandit
2.Mukesh Pandit
3.Nitu Kumari
4.Smt. Sudami Devi
5.Smt. Sewaki Devi
6.Smt. Paro Devi .... .. ... Appellant(s)
Versus
1.Vijay Kumar Modi
2.Jhuna Gupta @ Jhuna Verma
3.The National Insurance Company Limited, Giridih
.. ... ... Respondent(s)
...........
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through :-Video Conferencing)
.........
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. A. K. Lall, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) :
..........
04 / 07.04.2021. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that claimants, 1.Basudev
Pandit, 2.Mukesh Pandit, 3.Nitu Kumari, 4.Smt. Sudami Devi, 5.Smt. Sewaki Devi
and 6.Smt. Paro Devi are the appellants before this Court and they have preferred the
instant Misc. Appeal for enhancement of the Award dated 14.06.2018 passed by
learned District Judge-III-cum Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Giridih in Motor
Accident Claim Case No.45 of 2015, whereby the claimants have been awarded
compensation to the tune of Rs.5,42,500/- along with interest @7% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim application till the date of realization of the same
amount.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that deceased [Lilawati Devi]
died in a motor accident and she was a vegetable seller, earning a monthly income of
Rs.10,000/- per month and apart from that she was also engaged in household affairs,
but the learned Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per
month only contrary to the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Chameli
Devi vs. Jivrail Mian & Ors., reported in 2019(4) TAC 724 (SC) where the Apex
Court has held that it is very difficult to have documentary evidence of the income of
carpenter who lost his life in the year 2001 and considered the income of the
deceased in that case to be Rs.5,000/- in absence of any documentary evidence.
Here, the deceased (Lilawati Devi) was doing her own business as vegetable seller
and the learned Tribunal has considered her income as Rs.3,000/- per month, which
is a meager amount contrary to the claim of claimants as Rs.10,000/- per month.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that interest has been
awarded @7% per annum from the date of fling of the claim application which ought
to have been @7.5% per annum from the date of fling of the claim application in
view of consistent orders passed by this Court putting reliance upon the judgment of
Apex Court in the case of Dharmpal and Sons Vs. Up State Road Transport
Corporation, reported in 2008(4) JCR 79 SC wherein interest has been quantified
@7.5% per annum.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that respondent-
National Insurance Company Limited has been directed by the learned Tribunal to
indemnify the impugned award and vehicle was duly ensured before the respondent-
National Insurance Company Limited, as such, notice may be issued to the
respondent- National Insurance Company Limited.
Learned counsel for the appellants is directed to serve two copies of memo of
appeal, impugned judgment along with all relevant documents by today upon the
learned counsel for the respondent No.3, Mr. G. C. Jha, who normally appears for
the National Insurance Company L.T.D.
Put up this case on 20.04.2021.
Let name of learned counsel, Mr. G. C. Jha, appear in the Cause List on behalf
of the respondent-National Insurance Company Limited.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sandeep/
