Jharkhand High Court
Ketar Mahto vs Satish Choudhary on 13 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No.549 of 2015
----
1. Ketar Mahto S/o Late Hemant Mahto
2. Budhani Devi W/o Ketar Mahto
Both R/o Barki Dundi (Purnadih), P.S. Mandu, District Ramgarh.
... Appellants
-versus-
1. Satish Choudhary S/o Bijay Kumar Choudhary R/o Gola Road,
Ramgarh Cantt, P.S. & District Ramgarh.
2. M/s Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Extension Counter
Ramgarh, through The Branch Manager, M/s. Oriental Insurance
Company Ltd., Ranchi-Patna Road, Hazaribagh.
... Respondents
----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
----
For the Appellants : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, Advocate
----
8/ 13.06.2022 This appeal has been listed under the heading "For Orders", but
on the request of the parties, this appeal is being heard on merits finally.
Lower Court Records is also available and the parties assisted this Court.
2. Appellants have challenged the assessment of the quantum of
compensation, which was awarded to them vide award dated 02.09.2015
passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicles Accident Claim Tribunal,
Hazaribag in Claim Case No.229 of 2010.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that there
are evidence on record to suggest that the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/-
per month by imparting tuitions, but the Tribunal has considered his income to
be Rs.127/- per day, thus, considered the income of the deceased to be
Rs.3,302/- per month, which is against the evidence on record. He submits
that the deceased, though was a student studying in Polytechnic, yet, was
imparting tuitions. He further submits that in terms of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd.
versus Pranay Sethi & Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, enhancement
on account of future prospect has not been granted, and under the
conventional head, a paltry sum of Rs.15,000/- has been awarded, which
needs to be enhanced. He lastly submits that interest has been awarded at the
rate of 6% per annum, which is much on the lower side, which needs to be
enhanced.
4. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company submits
that there is no documentary evidence to suggest that either the deceased
was working or was imparting tuitions. He submits that in absence of any
materials, Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased to be
Rs.3302/- per month. Deceased was, admittedly, aged about 22 years, thus,
the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.3,71,616/- as compensation.
5. After hearing the parties, I find that the disputes lies in a very
narrow compass. Only dispute is in respect of the income of the deceased for
purposes of calculating the amount of compensation. Manner in which
accident had occurred, the fact that the offending vehicle was insured with the
Insurance Company have not been disputed. The fact that there was no
violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy has been admitted. That
being so, I am not interfering with these aspects, which are not disputed,
rather I am confining only to the dispute, which is in respect of income of the
deceased.
6. In support of the claim application, claimants have examined three
witnesses. Some documents were also marked as exhibits. As there are no
documents to suggest the income of the deceased, the Court has to rely only
upon the oral evidence. Applicant Witness No.1 has stated that his son was
studying in Gandhi Institute of Technology, pursuing the course of 'Fitter' and
was also imparting tuitions, and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. In cross
examination, he stated that there is no proof in support that the deceased was
imparting tuitions. Applicant Witness No.2 also stated that the deceased was
studying and was also imparting tuitions for which he was earning Rs.5,000/-
to Rs.6,000/- per month. He also, in cross examination, stated that he has not
seen the deceased receiving any money for imparting tuitions. Applicant
Witness No.3 also stated in similar manner. Thus, from the aforesaid oral
evidence it is evident that the deceased was a student and was imparting
some tuitions, but, there is divergent view on the income of the deceased.
Deceased was, admittedly, aged about 22 years, thus, his capability to teach
cannot be doubted. Thus, considering what has been narrated by the
witnesses, this Court feels that Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four Thousand) will be
correct assessment of income per month of the deceased for purposes of
computing the amount of compensation.
7. From the impugned award, it is admitted fact that enhancement of
compensation on account of future prospect has not been awarded in terms of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi
(supra) and the claimants are entitled to enhance compensation on account of
future prospect. Deceased was aged about 22 years, thus, 40% enhancement
should be awarded in the instant case.
8. Under the conventional head, a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees
Fifteen Thousand) only has been awarded, whereas in terms of the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), claimants
are entitled for Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand) under the
conventional head.
9. The rate of interest awarded to the claimants by the Tribunal is
6% per annum. I find no reason to interfere with the said rate of interest as
awarded by the Tribunal.
10. Thus, in view of what has been held above, the amount of
compensation can be quanitified in the following manner: -
Sl. Description Calculation Amount
No.
1 Amount of compensation taking monthly
4000 x 12 x 18 8,64,000.00
income at Rs.4,000/- with multiplier of '18'
2 Amount of compensation after deducting ½
8,64,000 - 4,32,000 4,32,000.00
on account of personal expenses
3 Amount of compensation after adding 40%
4,32,000 + 1,72,800 6,04,800.00
on account of future prospect
4 Amount of compensation adding the amount
6,04,800 + 70000 6,74,800.00
of Rs.70,000/- under conventional head
11. Thus, Rs.6,74,800/- (Rupees Six Lakh Seventy Four Thousand
Eight Hundred) is the amount, which should be the correct compensation
payable to the claimants. Tribunal has already awarded a sum of
Rs.3,71,616/-, thus, claimants are entitled to balance amount of Rs.3,03,184/-
(Rupees Three Lakh Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty Four). The balance
amount of Rs.3,03,184/- (Rupees Three Lakh Three Thousand One Hundred
Eighty Four) will carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the
award, i.e., 02.09.2015 till the date balance amount is paid to the claimants.
12. This appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent only.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-02
