Chola Mandalam M/S General ... vs Mira Devi
2021 Latest Caselaw 1466 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                 [Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction]
                        M.A. No. 77 of 2018
     Chola Mandalam M/S General Insurance Co. Ltd..... .. ...                       Appellant(s)
                                  Versus
     1.Mira Devi
     2.Akash Kumar Gupta
     3.Saurabh Kumar Gupta
     4.Asha Devi
     5.Dilip Kumar Gupta
     6.Jyoti Transport Co, I/c Krishna Singh
     7.Birendra Pathak                                             .. ... ... Respondent(s)
                                  With
                       M.A. No. 60 of 2019
     1.Mira Devi
     2.Akash Kumar Gupta
     3.Saurabh Kumar Gupta
     4.Asha Devi
     5.Dilip Kumar Gupta                                 .... .. ...          Appellant(s)
                                  Versus
    1.Jyoti Transport Co, I/c Krishna Singh
    2.Chola Mandalam M/S General Insurance Co. Ltd.
    3.Birendra Pathak                         .... ... ...         Respondent(s)
                       ...........

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

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate [M.A. No. 77 of 2018] Mr. Rajiv Anand, Advocate [M.A. No. 60 of 2019] For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajiv Anand, Advocate [M.A. No. 77 of 2018] ..........

10 / 23.03.2021.

Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Compnay has submitted that the appellant-- Chola Mandalam M/S General Insurance Co. Ltd. has preferred this Misc. Appeal against the Award dated 10.11.17 passed by learned Principal District Judge- cum- P.O., Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Civil Courts, Bokaro in Motor Accident Claim Case No.18 of 2015, whereby, the claimants, 1.Mira Devi, 2.Akash Kumar Gupta, 3.Saurabh Kumar Gupta, 4.Asha Devi and 5.Dilip Kumar Gupta [claimant nos.2 and 3 are represented through their natural guardian and mother, Mira Devi] have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.11,45,000/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of application i.e. 03.03.2015 till the date of indemnifying the award within four months from the date of passing of the award, failing which, the claimants will be entitled to receive penal interest @11% till the realization of the compensation amount.

Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Ashutosh Anand has fairly

submitted that deceased (Amit Kumar Gupta) lost his life in a motor accident on 25.12.2014 at the age of 33 years, leaving behind his wife, two minor sons and parents as dependents.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no relief has been claimed from the owner of the offending vehicle rather the instant Misc. Appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the quantum of compensation on the ground that the contents of the First Information Report is in contradiction of the charge-sheet submitted by the Police after investigation and the said charge-sheet has been brought on record by the claimants itself which has been marked as Exhibit-2.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the contributory negligence as the deceased (Amit Kumar Gupta) was not wearing helmet.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that it is an admitted position that the vehicle was insured and the deceased was a pillion rider.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that interest has been awarded on the higher side which ought to have been @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application in view of Section 171 of the M.V.Act and in view of 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 Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the learned Tribunal has granted excess amount under the conventional head contrary to 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 where under the conventional head amount of Rs.70,000/- is permissible [Loss of Estate-Rs.15,000/-, Loss of Consortium- Rs.40,000/- and Funeral expenses- Rs.15,000/-], while the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/- as Funeral expense, Rs.1 Lac as loss of love and affection of parents, Rs.1 lac as loss of love and affection to wife and children, Rs.1 Lac as loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac as loss of estate, which ought to be reduced in this appeal.

Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents while opposing the same, has submitted that the claimants have preferred M.A. No.60 of 2019 with a delay of 358 days and for condonation of the same, I.A. No.1133 of 2019 has been preferred before this Hon'ble Court, as it is a benevolent legislation and the

claimants have not been given any farthing, as such, the appeal has been preferred with such a delay which may be condoned.

Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents has submitted that the deceased (Amit Kumar Gupta) was a technician at TSL Technocrat, DVC Bokaro Thermal Power Station and he was appointed on a fixed salary of Rs.14,000/- which has been brought on record as Exhibit-6 and CW.1 (Ram Dilip Kumar Gupta) and C.W.2 (Mira Devi) have supported the same before the learned Tribunal but as the Site Engineer, TSL Technocrats has not been examined in this case, the learned Tribunal has stated that the claimants have wrongly claimed that the deceased was working in DVC whereas the salary slip which has been brought on record shows that deceased was working in the TSL Technocrat, as such, the learned Tribunal has considered income of the deceased to be Rs.5,000/- per month.

Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents has further submitted that Future Prospect of the deceased has not been considered which ought to have been granted by the learned Tribunal.

Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has submitted that the finding given by the learned Tribunal with regard to income is justified, as the document is not relied upon by the learned Tribunal.

Considering rival submissions of the parties and since amount of Rs.7,20,000/- has been deposited by the Insurance Company pursuant to the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, as such, it would be proper for this Court to allow the prayer for condoning the delay, as the bone of contention is computation of compensation between both the parties.

Considering the same, delay of 358 days in preferring Misc. Appeal bearing M.A. No.60 of 2019 is hereby condoned.

I.A. No.1133 of 2019 stands allowed.

Put up this case after three weeks.

In the meantime, let LCR be called for.

In the meantime, the appellant-Insurance Company is directed to verify the salary certificate of the deceased that if he was working in a company, TSL Technocrat which has been allotted work in the DVC.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sandeep/