Jharkhand High Court
Roshan Ara Begam vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ... on 5 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A No. 20 of 2016
------
1. Roshan Ara Begam
2. Nishat Parveen
3. Asim Zaffar .... .... Appellant(s).
Versus
1. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager, Bokaro Division
2. Manoj Kumar Jaiswal
3. Shashi Kumar Munda .... .... Respondent(s)
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
------
For the Appellant(S) : Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Savita Kumari, Advocate
9/05.07.2022
By filing this appeal the claimant has prayed to enhance the amount of
compensation which has been awarded by the District Judge-III-Cum-Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Bermo at Tenughat in Motor Accidents Claims Case No. 8 of 2009.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has raised one small issue in this
appeal wherein they have prayed for enhancing the amount of compensation. It is the
case that no enhancement has been awarded on account of Future Prospects in terms of
the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company
Limited Vrs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. Since the deceased
was Headmaster in School and had a permanent job and was less than 40 years of age,
50% enhancement should have been awarded on account of Future Prospects. He further
submits that Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier 14 in place of 15 when there
are documentary evidence to suggest that the deceased was aged less than 40 years at
the time of death. He lastly submits that interest has been only awarded till the date of
the award which should have been till the amount is paid.
3. Mr. Manish Kumar, counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company
submits that as per the post-mortem report the age of the deceased assessed was 42 years,
thus multiplier was correctly applied as 14 in the instant case. He further fairly submits
that compensation has to be calculated and assessed in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited (Supra).
4. Considering the limited scope of this appeal, I am not entering into the other
aspects which have not been raised and argued by the parties. The fact of accident, the
fact that vehicle was insured, liabilities etc have not been questioned in this appeal.
5. The claimants claim that the deceased was earning Rs.7500/- per month. This
fact has been accepted by the court and has not been challenged by the Insurance
Company. The multiplier applied in this case is 14. The Tribunal has considered the age
which was assessed by the doctor, who conducted the post-mortem. Doctor opined that
the deceased was of 42 years.
While I go through the Lower Court Records, I find that Exhibit-5 i.e Admit card of the
deceased was issued by the Bihar State Examination Board wherein date of birth of the
deceased was mentioned as 2.6.1969. This Admit Card definitely has got an evidentiary
value. The date of birth has been mentioned in the admit card which was issued long
time back, is certain proof of age and date of birth. Thus I hold that Tribunal has wrongly
rely on the post-mortem report while assessing the date of birth. The age of the deceased
thus as per the Admit Card is less than 40 years. Considering the age of the deceased to
be less than 40 years, the multiplier in the instant case will be 15 and not 14.
6. From the impugned judgment it is clear that the Tribunal has not enhanced the
amount of compensation considering the "Future Prospect". The deceased was a school
teacher thus was in a permanent salaried job getting Rs.7500/- per month. In view of the
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Limited (Supra) claimants are entitled for an enhancement @ 50% on the
compensation amount on Future Prospect.
7. So far as the interest is concerned, I find that 8% interest has been awarded to
the claimants from the date of the filing of the claim application till the date of the award.
The award is dated 30.9.2015. Counsel for the appellants fairly submits that to satisfy
the award the cheque was issued on 4.4.2016. Thus, the amount was satisfied within six
months from the date of the award. Considering the fact that 8% interest has been
awarded, I am not inclined to pass order to pay interest for the period of six month.
6. Considering what has been held above the amount of compensation will be
recalculated as follows:-
Rs.7500/- X 12 X 15(Multiplier)=Rs.13,50,000/-
Rs.13,50,000/- -1/3(Dependency)= Rs.9,00,000/-
Rs.9,00,000/- +50% (Future Prospects)= Rs.13,50000/-
Rs.13,50,000/-+ Rs.70,000/-=Rs14,20,000/-
7. The tribunal has awarded Rs. 8,65,000/-.The balance amount thus comes to
Rs.5,55,000/-. This balance amount should be paid by the Insurance Company to the
claimants within eight weeks from today. This balance amount will carry interest @ 7%
per annum from the date of the award which is 30.9.2015, till the same is paid.
8. Accordingly the instant appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.
(ANANDA SEN , J)
anjali/cp2
