The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ... vs Padmawati Devi
2021 Latest Caselaw 1805 Jhar

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                   C.M.P. No.599 of 2018
            The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Branch Main Road, Ranchi
            represented through the authorized officer Shyama Mishra.
                                                       ...           ...      Petitioner
                                       Versus
            1. Padmawati Devi
            2. Harihar Das
            3. Baleshwar Gope
            4. Shiv Kumar Baraik                        ...          ...      Opp. Parties
                                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---

            For the Petitioner            : Mr. K.L. Ojha, Adv.
            For the Opp. Parties          : Mr. Rajiv Anand, Amicus Curiae
                                         ---

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objections with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

---

07/17.04.2021: Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present case has been dismissed for default by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2018 in M.A. No.585 of 2015.

It has been further submitted that due to some personal difficulties, learned counsel for the petitioner could not appeared in the present case.

On the other hand, learned amicus curiae has assisted this Court and referred to the judgments reported in 2020 ACJ 2156 in the case of Surekha and others Vs. Santosh and others and 2015 (1) T.A.C. 673 (S.C.) and Jitendra Khimshankar Trivedi and Others vs. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and Others.

The present claim application has been filed by the parents of the deceased namely Gautam Das aged about 22 years, who had died in a road accident and a meager compensation of Rs.2,30,800/- has been granted to them.

Referring to the above judgments, it has been submitted that the minimum compensation should be at least Rs.8,00,000/-. It has further been submitted that even in the absence of counter appeal, the Court is duty bound to consider the interest of the claimants and, if it is found that inadequate compensation has been granted then the Court should enhance the interest considering the facts and circumstances of the case. The litigation is under the beneficial legislation and benefit of the claimants is paramount and technicalities cannot be an obstruction.

In view of the submission of the parties, the present petition being C.M.P. No.599 of 2018 is, hereby, allowed and M.A. No.585 of 2015 is restored to its original file.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Amar/-