Jharkhand High Court
Krishna Prasad vs Binay Kumar Singh on 13 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No. 130 of 2011
-----
Krishna Prasad. .... Appellant(s)
Versus.
1. Binay Kumar Singh
2. Smt. Rama Kumari Sinha
3. Ram Prawesh Yadav
4. Dilip Rai
5. The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Daltonganj.
6. The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Jamshedpur. ... Respondent(s).
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING.
-----
For the appellant(s): Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s): M/s Amresh Kumar and Pankaj Kumar, Advocates.
-----
19/13.7.2021: The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which
has been held through video conferencing today at 11:00 A.M. They have no
complaint in respect of the audio and video clarity and quality.
2. At the request of the parties, this appeal is being disposed of at this
stage itself.
3. Heard the counsel for the parties.
4. In this appeal, the appellant has prayed for enhancement of the
amount of compensation, which has been awarded to them by judgment and
award dated 22.1.2011 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal,
Ranchi in Compensation Case No. 148/2014.
5. Counsel for the appellant submits that on wrong basis, the amount of
compensation has been calculated. He submits that the disability is of 30% but
after assessing the income, the tribunal has taken the income to be Rs.88,228/-
per annum. He submits that the said findings arrived at by the Tribunal was after
taking average of total annual income of the financial years 2001-02 and 2003-
04. He submits that latest income should have been taken as per the income tax
return, which was at the time of the accident, which suggests that the total
income from business of the deceased was Rs.90,257/-. He further submits that
the age of victim was 49 years at the time of accident and thus the multiplier
would have been thirteen and not eight as considered by the Tribunal. He lastly
submits that on account of pain and sufferings only Rs.1,000/- has been
awarded, which is absolutely on the lower side.
6. Counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the accident had
taken place on 10.2.2003 and the amount of Rs.3,59,000/- along with interest
@6% p.a has been awarded, which is just and fair compensation. The tribunal
has taken average annual income of the injured and has arrived at a conclusion
that annual income of the injured at the time of accident was Rs.88,228/- p.a.
applying the multiplier of eight.
7. After hearing the parties and after going through the award, I find
that the insured was a passenger in a bus bearing registration No. BR 16P 0717,
which was going to Jamshedpur from Ranchi. On the way, the bus met with
accident with a Truck bearing registration No. BR 15G 2551, as a result of this
accident, the appellant sustained bodily injury, which was grievous in nature. The
appellant sustained injury at his eye and head for which, he had to be
hospitalized. The injured was 49 years of age at the time of accident, as per him,
he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by running a hotel.
8. On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed five issues,
which are as follows:-
(I) Whether the applicant's case filed U/s. 166 of the M.V Act is maintainable
in it present form?
(II) Whether the claimant has got valid cause of action for instituting this
compensation case?
(III) Whether the injured Krishna Prasad sustained injuries in a motor
vehicle accident occurred on 10.2.2003 due to rash and negligent driving
of the drivers of Bus No. BR 16P 0717 and Truck No BR 15G 2551?
(IV) Whether the claimant is entitled to get the amount of compensation
as claimed for? If so, to what extent and by whom?
(V) To what other relief or reliefs, the claimant is entitled to get?
9. The claimant examined three witnesses, one of them was the
Doctor, who treated the claimant. Several documents were exhibited on behalf of
the claimant- appellant. The Insurance Company did not produce any oral and
documentary evidence and thereafter, the Tribunal taking into consideration the
medical certificates considered the claim of the appellant and awarded a sum of
Rs.3,59,000/- along with 6% p.a interest from the date of closing of the evidence
till the expiry of sixty days from the date of judgment.
10. After hearing the parties, I find that the Doctor found that the injured
had suffered 30% disability and there was some injury on his eye and head. Eye
sight was reduced because of said accident and the injury of head was cured.
The appellant has produced his income tax return. From the return of the
financial year 2003-04, I find that the total income of the injured was shown to be
Rs.90,257/-. The Tribunal had assessed the income of the appellant as
Rs.88,228/- after averaging the same with the income of financial year 2001-02. I
further find that the income for the financial year 2001-02 is Rs.86,191/-, whereas
the same increased to Rs.90,257/- for the financial year 2003-04. This shows
that the income of the appellant increased.
11. This Court also feels that the Tribunal applied wrong multiplier,
considering the age of the appellant. The multiplier in this case should be thirteen
(13) and not eight(08). Further, this Court feels that the amount of Rs.1000/- on
account of pain and sufferings is on much lower side and the same should be
Rs.30,000/- for correct assessment of the claim. So far as medical expenses of
the hospitalization are concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the
findings arrived at by the Tribunal. The disability of the appellant to the tune of
30% is also accepted by both parties.
12. Considering the aforesaid facts, the calculation will read as follows:-
Rs.90,257 X 13= Rs.11,73,341/-
Rs.11,73,341/- X 30%= Rs.3,52,002/-
Rs.3,52,002/-+Rs.30,000/-(towards pain and sufferings)
= Rs.3,82,002/-
Over and above, the hospitalization and other medical expenses will
come to Rs.1,65,122 and Rs.5871/-.
13. Thus, the total amount (Rs.3,82,002/-+ Rs.1,65,122/- + Rs.5,871/-)
comes to Rs.5,52,995/-. Out of the aforesaid amount, Rs.3,59,000/- has already
been paid to the claimant. Thus the balance amount comes to Rs.1,93,995/-
(one lakhs ninety three thousand nine hundred ninety five).
14. In that view, I direct the Insurance Company to pay the balance
amount of Rs.1,93,995/- to the claimant-appellant within two months from today,
failing which, the same bears interest @ 8% p.a from today till the actual date of
payment.
15. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this appeal stands
allowed.
Anu/-CP-2 (ANANDA SEN, J.)
