Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Sapna Mishra vs Arjun Nath on 23 April, 2022
Author: Sunita Yadav
-( 1 )- M.A.No.821/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
MISC. APPEAL No. 821 of 2014
Between:-
SMT.SAPNA MISHRA W/O SHRI
NEERAJ MISHRA , AGED ABOUT
1. 32 YEARS, 36 SHAKUNTALAPURI
THATIPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
KU. SAKSHI MISHRA D/O LATE
SHRI NEERAJ MISHRA , AGED
ABOUT 7 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
2. MINOR MOTHER SMT. SAPNA
MISHRA 36- SHAKUNTLA PURI,
THATIPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
ANKUR MISHRA S/O LATE SHRI
NEERAJ MISHRA , AGED ABOUT
3 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR
3. MOTHER SMT. SAPNA MISHRA 36
SHAKUNTALAPURI THATIPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
DR. O.P. MISHRA S/O LATE SHRI
SHYAMLAL MISHRA , AGED
ABOUT 65 YEARS, 36
4.
SHAKUNTALAPURI THATIPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
SMT. RADHA MISHRA W/O SHRI
O.P. MISHRA , AGED ABOUT 62
5.
YEARS, 36 SHAKUNTALAPURI
THATIPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI ARUN SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
ARJUN NATH S/O SHRI SARDAR
1. NATH VILL JORASI P.S.BILAUA
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AVTAR SINGH S/O JWALA SINGH
-( 2 )- M.A.No.821/2014
OCCUPATION: VEHICLE OWNER
GRAM JORASI TEH. DABRA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE
NEW INSURANCE CO. LTD.
3. BEHIND GURUDWARA,
MOTIMAHAL ROAD, (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SHRINIWAS GAJENDRAGADKAR, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.3 - INSURANCE COMPANY)
Reserved on : 13.04.2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether approved for reporting :
JUDGMENT
(Passed on 23rd April, 2022)
This miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 (1) of
Motor Vehicle Act is filed assailing the award dated
30/06/2014 passed by First Additional Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Dabra, District Gwalior in Claim Case
No.72/2012 by which the tribunal has awarded the
amount of Rs.19,30,000/- as compensation on account of
deceased-Neeraj Mishra.
2. The necessary facts for disposal of the present
appeal in short are that on 21/12/2011 deceased Neeraj
Mishra was returning from Dabra to Gwalior by
motorcycle on his own side and as he reached near
Shankar Petrol Pump, Jourasi Mandir, Dabra, a tractor
-( 3 )- M.A.No.821/2014
driven rashly and negligently by respondent/non-
applicant No.1 bearing Registration No.MP07-HA-5811
hit the motorcycle of the deceased on account of which,
Neeraj Mishra sustained grievous injuries and died
during the treatment at Sahara Hospital, Gwalior. A
criminal case was registered against the driver of the
said tractor vide crime No.318/2011 under Section 174
of Cr.P.C. After enquiry under Section 174 of Cr.P.C.,
FIR was registered and after investigation, a criminal
case under Section 304-A of IPC was filed against the
respondent/non-applicant No.1.
3. Learned counsel for the claimants has argued that
award passed by the tribunal is contrary to the evidence
available on record. Learned Claims Tribunal erred in
calculating the compensation on the lower side. He has
further argued that as per income tax return for the year
2010-11(Exhibit P/19), the income should be calculated
after deduction of total taxes paid amounting to
Rs.3562/-. After deduction, the gross annual income
comes to Rs.1,91,019/-. However, the trial Court has
calculated the yearly income as Rs.1,80,000/-. He has
further stated that the other compensation head should
be given as per the case law laid down by Hon'ble Apex
-( 4 )- M.A.No.821/2014
Court National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay
Sethi and Ors., (2017 ACJ 2700) and United
Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur and Ors.,
(2020 ACJ 2131).
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the
respondent/Insurance Company opposed the submissions
and has argued that the award passed by the learned
tribunal is in accordance with settled principles of law
and facts available on record, therefore, need not be
inferred with. He has further argued that the
respondent/insurance company has already paid sum of
amount of compensation that should be deducted from
the final outcome.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
6. Exhibit P/19, the income tax return of deceased
Neeraj Mishra reads as below:
1 Gross total income 1 194581
2 Deduction under Chapter VI-A 2 NIL
3 Total income 3 194580
3a Current Year Loss (if any) 3a NIL
4 Net tax payable 4 3562
5 Interest payable 5 NIL
6 Total tax and interest payable 6 3562
7 Tax paid
-( 5 )- M.A.No.821/2014
(a) Advance Tax - 7a - NIL
(b) TDS - 7b - 35138
(c) TCS - 7c - NIL
(d) Self Assessment Tax - 7d - NIL
(e) Total Tax Paid (7a+7b+7c+7d)
8 Tax payable (6-7d) 8 NIL
9 Refund (7e-6) 9 31576
In view of the principles laid down in the case law
of Vijay Kumar Rastogi Vs. U.P. State Road
Transport Corporation (2018 ACJ 1029) as well as in
the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) , the arguments of
learned counsel for the appellants is found to be
acceptable that after deduction of total tax, the gross
income of the deceased comes to Rs.1,91,019/-.
7. In the present case, learned Tribunal has
considered the age of the deceased to be 36 years, which
has not been disputed by learned counsel for the
appellants.
8. In view of the principles laid down by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Ltd. (supra), the multiplier of 15 would be
applicable. Accordingly, the claimants/ appellants are
held to be entitled to receive the enhanced compensation
amount as under:-
-( 6 )- M.A.No.821/2014
Yearly Income : Rs.1,91,019/-
2/3 Dependency : Rs.1,27,346/-
Multiplier : 15
Total Income : Rs.19,10,190/-
Future Prospects : Rs.7,64,076/-
Other heads : Rs.70,000/-
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total : Rs. 27,44,266/-
9. As such, the total amount awarded to the claimants
is enhanced from Rs.19,30,000/- to Rs.27,44,266/-. The
enhanced amount comes to Rs.8,14,266/- (Rupees Eight
Lakh Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six only),
with interest at the rate as fixed by the tribunal in the
award which is ordered accordingly to be payable to the
claimants as directed by the Tribunal in the same
apportionment. The enhanced amount of compensation
Rs.8,14,266/- shall be payable to the claimants within 12
weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of
this order. Rest of the award impugned passed by the
Tribunal shall remain intact.
10. If the enhanced amount of compensation is in
excess to the valuation of appeal, the difference of the
-( 7 )- M.A.No.821/2014
Court fee (if not already paid) shall be deposited by the
appellants/ claimants within four weeks' from today and
proof thereof shall be submitted before the Registry.
Thereafter, Registry shall issue the certified copy of the
order passed today.
11. Appeal stand allowed to the aforesaid extent and
disposed of.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
Monika
MONIKA
SHARMA
2022.04.25
09:59:19 +05'30'
