Jharkhand High Court
Kamla Devi vs The New India Assurance Company ... on 11 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M. A. No. 86 of 2015
1. Kamla Devi
2. Rupendra Singh .... .... Appellants
Versus
1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd., East Singhbhum
2. Ravi Lal Soren
.... .... Respondents
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellants : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate
Oral Order
12 / Dated : 11.04.2022
1. Claimants have preferred the instant appeal for enhancement of
compensation of the award passed by District Judge III-cum-Motor
Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, East Singhbhum in Compensation
Case No.59 of 2009.
2. As per the claim case, son of the claimants died in a motor vehicle
accident involving a Truck bearing registration No.CG-05B-6308. It
is further case of the claimants that the deceased was working in
M/s Neha Bricks as Supervisor and he was earning Rs.8000/- per
month. The owner and insurer of the vehicle have been impleaded.
The learned Tribunal refused to accept Rs.8000/- per month and the
income of the deceased and award of compensation by taking
monthly income of Rs.3000/-.
3. The judgment of the Tribunal has been assailed mainly on the
ground that the claimant in support of income of the deceased had
filed Exhibit 4 which is salary certificate issued by employer M/s
Neha Bricks and also filed Exhibit 5 which is income tax return of
the year 2005-06 of the employer. Apart from the documentary
evidence on the point of income, Santosh Kumar Singh has been
examined as Claimant Witness No.2 and their partner Upendra
Kumar Singh, has also been examined as Claimant Witness No.1.
Both these witnesses have stated that he was earning Rs.8000/- per
month from M/s Neha Bricks. It is submitted that despite these oral
and documentary evidences, the income of the deceased was
assessed to Rs.3000/- and the award of compensation has been
made accordingly. Further, no award has been made under the head
'Future Prospect' and under 'Conventional' head.
4. Learned counsel on behalf of Insurance Company, Mr. G.C. Jha
submits that the Tribunal has assigned specific reasons for not
accepting the income as deposed and claimed by the witnesses. It is
submitted that the income of the deceased has been claimed to be
Rs 8000 on the basis of salary certificate (Ext 4) by Santosh kumar
Singh the partner of Neha Bricks. Whereas the income tax return of
Santosh Kumar Singh shows his annual income. This brings out the
incongruity of the claim in the income of the deceased which comes
to Rs.96,000/- more than the income of the proprietor /partner of
Neha Bricks. Any evidence that is produced on behalf of parties is
to be tested by the Tribunal to determine its veracity. Simply
because a salary certificate has been produced, it does not become a
conclusive prove of the income and the Tribunal has rightly not
accepted the claimed income for the reasons stated therein.
5. In view of the above, I do not find any error on the part of the
Tribunal to assess the income of the deceased to be Rs.3000/- per
month. The final compensation assessed as per the principles laid
down by Hon'ble Apex Court in (2017) 16 SCC 680 shall work out
as under:
Annual Income Rs.3,000x12=Rs. 36,000/-
Annual dependency after deducting Rs. 18,000/-
1/2nd as the deceased was a bachelor
Taking multiplier of 18 considering Rs.18,000 x 18 = Rs. 3,24,000
the age of the deceased to be 25years
Future Prospect at the rate of 40% Rs. 1,29,600
Conventional head Rs. 77,000
Total Rs. 5,30,600
The claimants shall therefore be entitled to compensation of
Rs.5,30,600 with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum on the
compensation amount from the date of filing of claim application
from the appellant Insurance Company. The Insurance Company is
accordingly directed to make payment of the compensation amount
to the Tribunal within a month of this order. The Tribunal shall
jointly pay the compensation amount to the claimants after proper
verification.
The appeal is allowed as at above.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Anit
