Jharkhand High Court
Urmila Devi & Others vs Lal Rameshwar Nath Shahdeo & ... on 21 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 184 of 2019
........
Urmila Devi & Others .... ..... Appellants
Versus
Lal Rameshwar Nath Shahdeo & Others ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conferencing)
............
For the Appellants : Ms. Sunita Kumari, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 3: Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate.
........
05/21.06.2021.
Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Ms. Sunita Kumari
and learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Mr. Manish Kumar.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that
claimants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award
dated 08.09.2017 passed by learned Principal District Judge-cum-
M.A.C.T., Gumla in M.A.C. Case No. 61/2014, whereby three
claimants namely, Urmila Devi, wife of Late Chhabilal Sahu, Lalita
Kumari, minor daughter of Late Chhabilal Sahu and Hemant Sahu,
son of Late Chhabilal Sahu have been awarded compensation to the
tune of Rs. 2,03,150/- along with interest @ 7% from the date of
institution of the case on 29.09.2014 till the date of realization.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the
compensation is a meagre amount which is not just and fair
compensation as learned Tribunal has considered the income of the
deceased to be Rs. 3,000/- per month, contrary to the judgment
passed by the Apex Court in the case of Chameli Devi & Others Vs.
Jivrail Mian & Others reported in 2019 (4) TAC 724 (SC). The
consortium has been paid to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- instead of Rs.
40,000/- contrary to the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the
case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and
Ors. reported in (2017) 17 SCC 680 (paragraph-59.8). The
contributory negligence has been wrongly deducted the tune of 50%,
which is contrary to the record as deceased was a pillion rider on a
motorcycle driven by one Sushil, another injured and the said
motorcycle was dashed by the bus from the back, as such, pillion
rider has no contributory negligence. The Insurance Company has
also not preferred any appeal against the same impugned award, as
such, amount of compensation may be enhanced. Further, as the
interest has also been granted @ 7% instead of 7.5% as consistently
held by this Court considering the judgment passed by the Apex
Court in the case of Dharampal and Sons Vs. U.P. State Road
Transport Corporation reported in 2008 (4) JCR 79 (SC).
Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Mr. Manish
Kumar has submitted that in the F.I.R., there is an averment that the
vehicle was dashed by offending bus insured before the Insurance
Company. In the claim application, claimants have mentioned that
the deceased was standing near his hotel, but the evidence which has
been adduced by the claimants are contrary to their own pleading.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary
to peruse the L.C.R. of M.A.C. Case No. 61/2014 as well as
photocopy of case diary of Gumla (Sisai) P.S. Case No. 20/2014.
Accordingly, office is directed to call for the L.C.R. of M.A.C.
Case No. 61/2014 from the court of Principal District Judge,
M.A.C.T., Gumla as well as case diary of Gumla (Sisai) P.S. Case
No. 20/2014.
Put up this case in the monthly cause list of July, 2021.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sunil/-
