Smt. Sumitra Devi vs M/S National Insurance Company ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 946 Jhar

                                                     1                     M.A. No. 467 of 2017


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 M.A. No. 467 of 2017
                1.   Smt. Sumitra Devi
                2.   Bhola Nath Pandey
                3.   Laloo Pandey
                4.   Rupa Kumari (minor)
                5.   Chhote Lal Pandey (minor)
                6.   Sonali Kumari (minor)                          ... Appellants
                                           -Versus-
                1.   M/s National Insurance Company Limited
                2.   Mr. Jamuna Prasad                              ... Respondents
                                             -----

            CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                             -----
            For the Appellants         : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
            For Respondent No.1        : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
                                         Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Advocate
                                             -----

10/27.02.2023        Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and

Mr. Manish Kumar and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, learned counsel for

respondent no.1.

2. This appeal has been filed being dissatisfied with the judgment/award

dated 27.04.2017 passed by the learned District Judge VIII cum M.A.C.T.,

Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Claim Case No.365/2014 and for enhancement of

the awarded amount on behalf of the claimants.

3. On 25.11.2014 at about 07:00 p.m., Hari Lal Pandey (deceased) and

Bhola Nath Pandey, both were going to Ajabdih to attend marriage

ceremony from his hotel situated at Pandeydih. When he reached near

Ajabdih More, a truck (container) bearing registration no. HR-38N-4690

which was being driven rashly and negligently and coming from Rajganj

side dashed Hari Lal Pandey, due to which he sustained serious injuries and

died on the spot. After the accident, Govindpur (Barwadda) P.S. Case

No.548 of 2014 dated 26.11.2014 was registered against the driver of the

offending truck. The postmortem on the dead body of the deceased was

conducted at PMCH, Dhanbad. It was claimed that the deceased Hari Lal

Pandey was aged about 40 years and he was self employed as owner of a

line hotel and earned Rs.12,000/- per month and the claimants have made

a claim for compensation of Rs.17,37,500/- before the learned tribunal.

4. Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants submits that

the deceased was running a line hotel and he was earning Rs.12,000/- per

month, however the learned tribunal has only considered the income of the

deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month, which is required to be enhanced. He

further submits that future prospect and conventional head in view of the

judgment passed in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi;

[(2017) 16 SCC 680] the amount is on lesser side, which are required to

be enhanced in view of the judgment passed in the said case.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel for respondent

no.1 submits that the learned tribunal has taken into consideration the

evidence and thereafter come to that conclusion that the income of the

deceased was Rs.4,500/- per month. He further submits that this Court may

not interfere with the award.

6. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties, the Court has gone through the judgment/award passed by the

learned tribunal and finds that the learned tribunal has fixed the income of

the deceased to the tune of Rs.4,500/- per month, however it appears that

two witnesses have supported the case on the point of income of the

deceased to the tune of Rs.12,000/- per month and they have stated that

the deceased was running a hotel in the name of Baba shop and by way of

that, he was earning the sum of Rs.12,000/- per month. In the claim case,

the said averment was also there, which was supported by two witnesses.

Thus, it appears that the learned tribunal has fixed the amount of

Rs.4,500/- on lesser side, which is required to be enhanced. Accordingly, the

same is enhanced to the tune of Rs.6,000/- per month.

7. The deceased was 40 years of age and in view of the judgment

passed in Pranay Sethi (supra), future prospect was required to be added to

the tune of 40% and conventional head was required to be added to the

tune of Rs.70,000/-. Accordingly, the award dated 27.04.2017 is modified to

the extent that the amount of income is fixed at Rs.6,000/- per month,

future prospect shall be added in the award as 40% and conventional head

will be fixed at Rs.70,000/- in view of the judgment passed in Pranay Sethi

(supra). The award is modified to the above extent.

8. It has been pointed out that the awarded amount has been received

by the claimants. The difference of the amount, in terms of the present

appeal allowed today, shall be paid to the claimants within a period of eight

weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The

interest shall be added on differential amount in terms of the award.

9. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and disposed of.

10. Let the L.C.R. be sent back to the concerned learned court forthwith.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/