Manager vs Mahadeo Oraon
2021 Latest Caselaw 882 Jhar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   [Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction]
                          M.A. No. 51 of 2015
         Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd..... .. ...       Appellant(s)
                                    Versus
         1.Mahadeo Oraon
         2.Sahdeo Oraon
         3.Budhni Orain
         4.Hiralal Oraon
         5.Hiramuni Kumari
         6.Sabitri Kumari
         7.Fulmani Kumari
         8.Benedict Kerketta
         9.Ranjit Mahato                                           .. ... ... Respondent(s)
                         ...........

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through :-Video Conferencing) .........

      For the Appellant(s)           :    Mr. G. C. Jha, Advocate.
      For the Resp. Nos.1 to 7 :          Mr. S. K. Ganjhu, Advocate
                                          Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
                         ..........
06 / 23.02.2021.   I.A. No.697 of 2015.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is delay of 46 days in preferring the instant Misc. Appeal and for condonation of the same, I.A. No.697 of 2015 has been filed and reason for delay has been mentioned at Para-3 of the Interlocutory application, as such, delay of 46 days may be condoned.

Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the prayer.

Learned counsel for the claimants has submitted that the aforesaid delay in filing the present appeal has not been properly explained by the appellant- Insurance Company,

Considering the rival submission of the parties and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, delay of 46 days in preferring the instant Misc. Appeal is hereby condoned as no counter-affidavit has been filed.

The aforesaid I.A. stands allowed.

M.A. No. 51 of 2015

Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

The appellant- National Insurance Company Ltd..has preferred this Misc. Appeal against the award dated 17.09.2014 passed by learned Principal District Judge-cum- M.A.C.T., Gumla, in M.A.C. Case No.32/2004, whereby, the claimants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.2,72,476/- after deducting Rs.50,000/- paid, as ad-interim compensation under Section 140 M.V. Act along with pendente lite interest @7% per annum to be calculated from 10.12.2013 .

Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has submitted that initially the father of the deceased (Sukhdeo Oraon), namely, Sanicharwa Oraon was the only claimant, who died during pendency of the claim case. Thereafter three brothers of the deceased, namely, Laldeo Oraon, Mahadeo Oraon and Sahdeo Oraon were substituted vide order dated 03.05.2015. During pendency of the claim case, Laldeo Oraon (claimant No.1(A) had also died. Thereafter his wife and children were substituted in his place and thereafter other persons have been substituted as legal heirs.

Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents has submitted that a meager amount of Rs.2,72,476/- along with interest @ 7 % per annum has been awarded by learned Tribunal, but no appeal has been preferred by the claimants, as such, the instant Misc. Appeal may be dismissed, as the learned Tribunal has not taken note of other legal heirs while computing the compensation, which will be apparent from the chart given at Para No.38 of the impugned judgment. The learned Tribunal only considering the dependency of the father, as the deceased was bachelor, deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (SMT) and Ors., vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr, reported in (2009) 16 SCC 121 at Para 30.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials brought on record, it appears that a petty amount has been awarded by the learned Tribunal to the claimants and no appeal has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of the Award. The learned Tribunal has rightly calculated the dependency by deducting of 50% towards personal and living expenses considering the deceased to be a bachelor, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra). During pendency of litigation, actual dependent died, as such, claim cannot be rejected. As such, the subsequent legal heirs of the deceased are entitled to receive the same, though they have not been considered as dependents, but they are legal heirs.

Accordingly, the instant appeal being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in view of the order dated 21.09.2017, the appellant has deposited Rs.1,50,000/- before the learned Tribunal.

The balance amount, if left, after calculating the interest on the awarded amount from 10.12.2013 till the date of actual indemnifying the Award, shall be paid by the appellant -Insurance Company within a reasonable time.

The learned Registrar General of this Court is directed to refund/remit the statutory amount deposited by the appellant-Insurance Company at the time of preferring the appeal before this Court before the learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today. .

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sandeep/