Jharkhand High Court
The Divisional Manager The New ... vs Nooresha Khatoon on 13 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 323 of 2018
......
The Divisional Manager The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ...... Appellant
Versus
1. Nooresha Khatoon
2.Sri Amar Nath Singh
3.Sanjib Das
4.M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Dhanbad ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
[Through- Video Conferencing]
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. D.C. Ghosh, Advocate
For the Respondent
-----
06/Dated: 13/07/2021.
Heard, learned counsel for the appellant- Mr. D.C. Ghosh.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has preferred this appeal against
the award dated 15.12.2017 passed by learned District Judge-XI-cum-
MACT, Judge, Dhanbad in Motor Accident Claim Case No.155 of 2008,
whereby the claimant, namely, Nooresha Khatoon, W/o Md. Rafique
of Nishat Nagar, Wasseypur, P.S. Bankmore Dist. Dhanbad has been
awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs.9,37,200/- (out of which
Rs.50,000/- has already been paid under Section 140 of the MV Act), as
such, the balance amount of Rs.8,87,200/- is to be paid to the claimant
within a period of six months from the date of award. However, the
Insurance Company has been given right to recover the same from the
owner of the truck bearing registration No.UP 60B 3569.
Mr. D.C. Ghosh appearing for the Insurance Company has
submitted that there is delay of 54 days in preferring the appeal and for
condonation of the same, I.A. No. 3758 of 2019 has been filed.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned
Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased on the higher side
as the deceased- Md. Nisar was a fruit seller, who lost his life at the age
of 23 years, but the learned Tribunal has considered the income of the
deceased to be Rs.6,000/- without having any documentary evidence,
as such, compensation amount may be reduced.
After hearing, learned counsel for the appellant and on the basis of
facts and circumstances of the case and looking into the compensation
awarded by the learned Tribunal, it appears that amount of income of
Rs.6,000/- per month of the deceased, who was fruit seller has been
considered by the learned Tribunal, who lost his life on 16.01.2007 in an
accident is not arbitrary consideration, in view of the judgment passed
by the Apex Court in the case of Chameli Devi vs. Jivrail Mian,
reported in 2019 (4) TAC 724 SC. The Apex Court has considered the
income of a carpenter, who lost his life on 02.01.2001 to be Rs.5,000/- in
absence of any documentary evidence, as such, this Court is satisfied
that it is just and fair compensation.
Apart from that under the heading of loss of consortium, in view of
the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Ltd. vs, Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680
at Para 59.8, the same has not been paid, but in absence of any appeal
preferred by the claimant, this Court cannot enhance the compensation
amount in an appeal, preferred by the Insurance Company, in view of the
judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Ranjana Prakash &
Ors. vs. Divisional Manager & Anr., reported in 2011 (14) SCC 639 at Para-8,
which may profitably be quoted hereunder :-
"8. Where an appeal is filed challenging the quantum of compensation, irrespective
of who files the appeal, the appropriate course for the High Court is to examine the
facts and by applying the relevant principles, determine the just compensation. If
the compensation determined by it is higher than the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the High Court will allow the appeal, if it is by the claimants and dismiss
the appeal, if it is by the owner/insurer. Similarly, if the compensation determined
by the High Court is lesser than the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the
High Court will dismiss any appeal by the claimants for enhancement, but allow
any appeal by the owner/insurer for reduction. The High Court cannot obviously
increase the compensation in an appeal by the owner/insurer for reducing the
compensation, nor can it reduce the compensation in an appeal by the claimants
seeking enhancement of compensation."
As such, this Court has considered, the compensation to be
just and fair compensation as accepted by the claimant by not
preferring any appeal for enhancement. This Court is not inclined to
interfere with the impugned award.
Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal is hereby dismissed.
However, the right of recovery, which has been granted in favour of
the Insurance Company after satisfying the award to the claimant to
recover the same from owner of the offending vehicle namely, Sri
Amar Nath Singh, S/o Shiv Mohan Singh of Manpur, Chitbadangaon,
Ballia, Dist. Ballia- 277001 (U.P.) remain intact as no appeal has been
preferred by owner.
I.A. No.3758 of 2019 stands closed.
The Statutory amount deposited by the Insurance Company before
this Court at the time of preferring the appeal shall be remitted by the
learned Registrar General of this Court to the learned Tribunal within a
period of four weeks from today to satisfy part of the award. The
learned Tribunal/Executing Court shall disburse the same to the
claimant after due notice and verification.
The balance amount shall be paid by the Insurance Company within
a reasonable time as the accident is of dated 16.01.2017.
( Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
R.S-
