Jharkhand High Court
Manjhowa Manjhi & Another vs Tahid Alam & Others on 23 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 205 of 2019
........
Manjhowa Manjhi & Another .... ..... Appellants
Versus
Tahid Alam & Others .... ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conferencing)
............
For the Appellants : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate.
........
04/23.08.2021.
Heard, learned counsel, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan, on the
instruction of learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Mukesh Bihari
Lal and learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 / Oriental Insurance
Company Ltd., Mr. Pratyush Kumar.
Learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan has
submitted that the claimants namely, (1) Manjhowa Manjhi, son of
Ragda Manjhi and father of deceased Lacho Kumari and (2) Karmi
Devi, wife of Manjhowa Manjhi and mother of deceased Lacho
Kumari, have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award
dated 31.01.2018 passed by learned District Judge-XIV-cum-Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Case No. 146 of
2013, whereby the claimants have been awarded compensation to the
tune of Rs. 5,84,800/-, after deducting amount of Rs. 50,000/-, which
has already been paid under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
along with simple interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of
suit till its payment, to be paid within 45 days from the date of award.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the
deceased Lacho Kumari was a labourer and was earning Rs. 4,500/-
per month and the deceased died admittedly at the age of 35 years
remaining Bachelor and as such, 50% of the income has been
deducted as personal and living expenses in view of the judgment
passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors.
Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC
121 (Para-30) and the multiplier of 16 has been rightly applied by the
learned Tribunal in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in
the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) (Supra) (Para-42) as the deceased
died between the age group of 31-35 years.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that so
far amount under the conventional head is concerned, the learned
Tribunal has granted less amount contrary to the judgment passed by
the the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 (Para-
59.8), where Rs. 15,000/- has been considered for loss of estate,
Rs. 15,000/- has been considered for funeral expenses and Rs.
40,000/- has been considered for loss of consortium.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that
the interest has been awarded @ 6% per annum, instead of @ 7.5%
as envisaged in the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
Dharmpal and Sons Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation
reported in (2008) 12) SCC 208, as such, the award may be enhanced.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that
there is delay of 359 days in preferring the appeal and for condonation
of the same, I.A. No. 1177/2020 has been preferred, as such, delay
may be condoned.
Learned counsel for the Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
Mr. Pratyush Kumar has submitted that though the amount has been
satisfied by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, pursuant to the
award passed by the learned Tribunal, but the present appeal has been
preferred thereafter, as such, the present appeal may be dismissed and
delay may not be condoned.
Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the
Insurance Company and perused the impugned award. It appears that
the learned Tribunal has awarded less amount in view of judgment
passed by the Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra), as such,
considering it to be benevolent legislation, the delay is hereby
condoned as compensation shall be just and fair in view of judgment
passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ranjana Prakash &
Others Vs. Divisional Manager & Another reported in 2011 (14) SCC
639.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 1177/2020 is allowed.
The admitted facts are not under dispute that the deceased died as
a Bachelor at the age of 35 years by offending vehicle, which was duly
insured before the Oriental Insurance Company Limited.
So far computation of compensation, which has been assailed
before this Court is concerned, this Court finds that the learned Tribunal
has considered the income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- per month as
no documentary evidence has been brought on record, as such, this
Court is not inclined to interfere with the income of the deceased.
So far amount under the conventional head is concerned, the
same is enhanced as Rs. 70,000/- instead of Rs. 30,000/- in view of the
judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi
(Supra) (Para-59.8).
So far interest is concerned, the same is granted @ 7.5% per
annum in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
Dharmpal and Sons (Supra).
As such, this Court compute the compensation afresh, which is
as follows:-
Income Rs. 4,500/- per month
Annual Income Rs. 4,500/- x 12 = Rs. 54,000/-
40% future prospect Rs. 54,000/- + Rs. 21,600/-
Pranay Sethi (Para-59.4) (Supra) = Rs. 75,600/-
1/2th deduction towards personal Rs. 75,600/- x 1/2 = Rs. 37,800/-
and living expenses
Sarla Verma (Smt.) (Supra)
(Para-30)
Total Income Rs. 75,600/- - Rs. 37,800/-
= Rs. 37,800/-
Multiplier of 16 (as the deceased Rs. 37,800/- x 16 = Rs. 6,04,800/-
was in the age group of 31-35
years) Sarla Verma (Para-42)
(Supra)
Conventional Head Rs. 70,000/- i.e. Rs. 15,000/- as loss of
Pranay Sethi (Para-59.8) estate, Rs. 40,000/- as loss of consortium
and Rs. 15,000/- as funeral expenses.
Total Compensation Amount Rs. 6,04,800/- + Rs. 70,000/-
= Rs. 6,74,800/-
Paid under Section 140 of M.V. Act Rs. 6,74,800/- - Rs. 50,000/-
= Rs. 6,24,800/-
The enhanced amount of Rs. 6,24,800/- shall be paid to the
claimants by the Insurance Company along with interest @ 7.5% per
annum from today as the amount has already been indemnified by the
Insurance Company and the appeal has been filed with delay of 359
days, as such, claimants are not entitled for any interest during
pendency of the appeal.
The Insurance Company shall indemnify the balance amount of
compensation, after deducting the amount, which has already been
paid, along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from today till the date of
indemnifying the award.
Accordingly, the present miscellaneous appeal is allowed.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sunil/-
