Jharkhand High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Mangri Orain on 3 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 516 of 2015
......
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Jamshedpur ...... Appellant
Versus
1. Mangri Orain
2. Sushil Oraon
3. Dassay Oraon
4.Sukhdeo Oraon
5.Sonmatia Orain
6. Dashmi Orain
7. Mansaram Tiwari .......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conferencing)
For the Appellant : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. Nos.1-6 : Mr. Rajiv Anand, Advocate
Mr. Priya Agrawal, Advocate
05/Dated: 03/03/2021.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellants- -
New India Assurance Co. Ltd has preferred instant Miscellaneous Appeal
against the award dated 03.09.2015 passed by learned Principal District
Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lohardaga, in
Compensation Case No.36 of 2011 whereby the claimants namely, 1.
Mangri Orain, 2. Sushil Oraon, 3. Dassay Oraon, 4.Sukhdeo Oraon,
5.Sonmatia Orain and 6. Dashmi Orain have been awarded compensation
to the tune of Rs.6,66,800/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the
date of institution till its actual realization. The amount received under
Section 140 of the MV Act will be deducted from the original amount of
compensation and after deducting it, the amount of compensation with
interest will be calculated and paid.
Learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company has assailed
the impugned Award on the ground that the learned Tribunal has
granted excess amount under the conventional head to the tune of
Rs.3,50,000/- instead of Rs.70,000/- 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 i.e. for loss of Estate to be
Rs.15,000/-, for loss of consortium to be Rs.40,000/- and for funeral expenses
to be Rs.15,000/-.
Learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company has further
submitted that penal interest has been awarded @ 10% from the date of
award till the date of actual realization which is contrary to the principal
laid down under Section 171 of the M.V. Act coupled with the judgment
passed by the Apex Court in the case of Dharampal & Sons Vs. U.P.
Transport Corporation, reported in 2008 (4), JCR 79 SC, as such, that part of
the award may be considered and accordingly, the order may be passed.
Learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents, Mr.
Rajiv Anand while opposing the same has submitted, that since the
quantum of compensation has been assailed by the appellant-New India
Assurance Company Limited, as such, 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, it would be proper for this Court to compute the just and
fair compensation.
Learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents has
submitted that interest has been paid on the lower side i.e. @ 6% instead
of simple interest @ 7.5% per annum in view of the judgment passed by
the Apex Court in the case of Dharampal (supra).
Learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents has
further submitted that the income of the deceased which has been
claimed by the claimants to the tune of Rs.6,000/- per month has been
wrongly considered by the learned Tribunal to the tune of Rs.3,000/- per
month in absence of any documentary evidence.
Learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents has
further submitted, that recently apex Court in the case of Chameli Devi
vs. Jivrail Mian, reported in 2019 (4) TAC 724 SC has held that in absence
of any documentary evidence, in the case of person like a carpenter, who
died in the year 2002, the Apex Court has considered the income to be
Rs.5,000/- per month, as such, this Court may also consider income to be
Rs.6,000/- per month as claimed by the claimants as the occurrence is of
dated 26.03.2010 and deceased was engaged in agriculture and labour
work.
Considering such submissions and in view of the ratio laid down by
the Apex Court in the case of Ranjana Prakash (supra), this Court has to
determine the just and fair compensation. It appears that the deceased
died in a motor accident on 26.03.2010 leaving behind his six dependents.
The vehicle was insured, as such, there is no dispute about the same. The
deceased died at the age of 55 years which is also not in dispute.
This Court also considers the income of the deceased as Rs.5,000/- per
month in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
Chameli Devi (Supra).
As such, the final computation of compensation is as follows:-
Income Rs.5,000/- per month
Annual Income Rs.5,000/- x 12 = Rs.60,000 /-
10% Future Prospect Rs.60,000 /- + Rs.6,000/- = Rs.66,000/-
Pranay Sethi (Supra) para 59.4
1/4th Deduction towards personal and Rs.66,000/- minus (Rs.66,000/- x 1/4) =
living expenses as the dependents are
Rs.49,500/-
4-6
Sarla Verma (Supra) para 30
Multiplier of 11 (as the deceased was Rs.49,500/- x 11 = Rs.5,44,500/-
in the age group of 51-55 years)
Sarla Verma (Supra) para 42
Conventional Head Rs.70,000/-
Pranay Sethi (Supra) para 59.8
Total Compensation Amount Rs.5,44,500/- + Rs.70,000/- =
Rs.6,14,500/-
Appellant- Insurance Company is directed to pay compensation of
Rs.6,14,500/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of
claim application till its realization. However, the amount already paid by
the Insurance Company shall be deducted from the aforesaid amount.
As the Insurance Company has preferred the instant Misc. Appeal
within time, the penal interest which has been awarded by the learned
Tribunal @10% is not applicable in the present case. Accordingly, the
penal interest is waived off.
Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal stands disposed of.
The statutory amount deposited by the Insurance Company before this
Court while preferring the appeal shall be remitted to the learned Tribunal
by the learned Registrar General of this Court within a period of four weeks
from today and the balance amount shall be paid within a reasonable period,
as the accident is of the year 2010.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
sandeep/-
