Jharkhand High Court
The New India Assurance Company ... vs Niwas Kumar on 4 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Misc. Appeal No. 155 of 2012
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Ranchi
.... .... Appellant
Versus
1. Niwas Kumar
2. Nand Kishor Singh
3. Manoj Kumar
4. Umesh Kumar
.... .... Respondents
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Munna Lal Yadav, Advocate
C.A.V. ON 23.12.2021 PRONOUNCED ON 04/ 01/ 2022
1. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the
judgment and award of compensation in Claim Case No. 30/2006 where-
by and whereunder the liability for paying compensation has been saddled
on the Insurance Company.
2. The appeal has been preferred mainly on the ground that neither
the owner nor the driver appeared before the learned Tribunal and conse-
quently, ex-parte proceeding had been drawn against them. On the basis
of the documents available in the criminal case record, investigator of the
Insurance Company investigated into the matter and submitted investiga-
tion report which has been marked as Exhibit-A on behalf of the Insurance
Company. As per Column-10 of the reportit has been stated that no driv-
ing licence was found of the driver Umesh @ Kaila Yadav son of Jogi
Yadav in the criminal case record of Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 19/2006
registered under section 279/337/338 of IPC.It has been also noted in in-
vestigation report that the permit of the vehicle being no. 3879/2005 was
valid upto 20.11.2005 from 04.05.2005 on this basis it is contended that
accident took place on 19.03.2006 and on the date of accident the vehicle
was having no permit for transport. In view of the violation of the terms
and condition of the insurance policy, the Insurance Company seeks to be
excused from the liability to pay the compensation amount.
3. From the impugned judgment it is manifest that owner and
driver of the offending vehicle (O.P. No. 1&2) did not appear and conse-
quently the case proceeded ex-parte. The claimant produced the driving
licence which has been marked as Exhibit-6 which is issued in the name
ofUmesh Kumar Yadav bearing DL No. 714/2004 for LMV by DTO,
Chatra. On the face of this exhibi , the argument on behalf of the Insur-
ance Company before this Court that the driving licence was not produced
is very surprising. It was open to the Insurance Company to challenge va-
lidity of Ext 6, but to say that no driving licence was produced on behalf
of claimant, is misleading and factually incorrect submission made before
this Court. Instead of impeaching the credibility of this document its
availability has itself been denied, to raise a defence of breach of condi-
tion of terms of the insurance policy. The plea is therefore rejected.
4. The written statement filed on behalf of the Insurance Company
is a evasive denial of the entire content of the claim application on insur-
ance, driving licence, permit etc. In para- 6 of the written statement there
is an express denial of the insurance policy.The Tribunal in its finding on
issue no. 5 at para-7 of the judgment has recorded a finding of valid insur-
ance policy. This finding has not been challenged by the Insurance Com-
pany, meaning thereby that the averment made in para-6 of W.S. was fac-
tually incorrect. Unfortunately, this is another instance of falsity on the
part of Insurance Company. Act 46 of 1999 by which O VI R (4) inserted
in the CPC wef 1.7.2002 requiring pleading to be supported by affidavit,
was aimed to check this menace of false pleas in pleadings of the parties.
The pleadings have a sanctity as they are supported by sworn affidavit and
for any false statement criminal prosecution can be initiated against those
who swear false affidavit.
In this view of matter where the pleading of the Insurance Com-
pany is false, no reliance can be placed on investigation report ad-
duced in evidence on behalf of the Insurance Company regarding ab-
sence of permit.
5. Although the claimant has not preferred the appeal for enhancement,
but on the perusal of the award there appears need for computation
afresh to award just and fair compensation.
The learned Tribunal has accepted the monthly income of de-
ceased to be Rs. 3000/- as the monthly income on the basis of the ev-
idence on record and there is no patent reason for disturbing the finding
of fact of the learned Court below.
Taking Rs. 3,000/- as the monthly income, 50% to be deducted
on personal and living expenses since the deceased was a bachelor, and
multiplier of 18 applicable to age of 20 the final compensation amount
will work out as follows:-
Annual dependency --- Rs. 18,000/-
Compensation --- Rs. 18,000 x 18 = Rs. 3,24,000/-
Addition of 40% under the head of future prospect --- Rs. 1,29,600/-
Compensation under conventional head ---- Rs. 77,000/-
____________________________________
Final and total compensation Rs.5,30,600/-
The claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 5,30,600/-
with interest @ of 7.5% from the date of application. The appellant Insur-
ance Company is directed to make full and final satisfaction of the award
and to that end make the payment to the learned Tribunal within a month
of this order. The Tribunal to disburse the amount to the claimants after a
due identification and verification.
In the result the appeal is dismissed with the above modifica-
tion of the award. The statutory amount is permitted to be withdrawn by
the Insurance Company.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated the 4th January, 2022
NAFR / AKT
