Gajendra vs Dilip
2022 Latest Caselaw 16486 MP

                                                                    1
                                   IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                        AT JABALPUR
                                                             BEFORE
                                               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                    ON THE 13 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                                      MISC. APPEAL No. 3273 of 2013

                                  BETWEEN:-
                                  GAJENDRA S/O SHRI ANTULAL PAWAR, AGED ABOUT
                                  50 YEARS, JOKHERA, TAHSIL BETUL, DISTRICT BETUL
                                  (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....APPELLANT
                                  (BY SHRI VIKAS JYOTISHI - ADVOCATE)

                                  AND
                                  1.    DILIP S/O SHYAMLAL PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 37
                                        YE A R S , BHAWANI MOHALLA BETUL BAZAR,
                                        BETUL, DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                  2.    PRADEEP S/O SHIV PRASAD VERMA, AGED
                                        ABOUT 34 YEARS, BETUL BAZAR DISTT. BETUL,
                                        (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                  3.    THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. 5TH
                                        LINE ITARSI DISTT. HOSHANGABAD, (MADHYA
                                        PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                                  (BY SHRI GULAB CHAND SOHANE - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3
                                  ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.)

                                        This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                  following:
                                                                     ORDER

Heard on I.A.No.15589/2022, an application seeking amendment in the valuation and to pay Court Fees accordingly. Signature Not Verified SAN

On due consideration, application is allowed. Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI

Appellant is permitted to amend the valuation and the Court Fees is taken Date: 2022.12.14 19:23:21 IST

on record.

This appeal is filed by the claimant being aggrieved of award dated 31/07/2013 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Multai, District Betul in MCC No.63/2011 on the ground that for an accident which took place on 15/09/2010 learned Tribunal has construed the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month, whereas minimum wages on the date of the accident even for an unskilled labourer were to the tune of Rs.3,995/- or rounded off to Rs.4,000/- per month. He further submitted that learned Tribunal though accepted extent of permanent disability to be 30%, but has not taken into consideration the aspect of future prospect and that aspect too is required

to be taken into consideration while making computation.

Shri Gulab Chand Sohane, learned counsel for the Insurance Company in his turn supports the award and submits that Insurance Company has been exonerated on the ground of lack of permit.

Shri Vikas Jyotishi submits that in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in Pappu and others Vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and another, (2018) 3 SCC 208 , though Insurance Company has been exonerated on the ground of permit, but order of pay and recover can be passed against the Insurance Company.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, if income of the claimant as per the minimum wages is taken into consideration and 30% disability as accepted by the Tribunal is taken into consideration, then loss of earning capacity comes out to Rs.1,200/- per month. 40% is to be added towards future prospects, that will take total loss of earning Signature Not Verified SAN

capacity to Rs.1,680/- per month or Rs.20,160/- per annum. Then multiplier of Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2022.12.14 19:23:21 IST

18 will be applied as per the law laid down by Supreme Court in Sarla Verma

(Smt) & Others versus Delhi Transport Corporation & Another (2009) 6 SCC 121, as the age of the claimant is between 20-25 years as per the prescription (Ex.A-2), then total compensation under the head of loss of earning capacity will come out to Rs.3,62,880/- against a sum of Rs.1,83,600/-. Thus, there will be enhancement to the tune of Rs.1,79,280/- (Rs. One Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Only), inasmuch as there is no need for showing indulgence under other heads.

Thus, it is directed that claimant will be entitled to additional sum of Rs.1,79,280/-, over and above the amounts awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal. This additional amount will also earn interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of actual payment.

In the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Pappu and others Vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and another, (2018) 3 SCC 208 Insurance Company will be liable to pay the compensation and will be free to recover it from the owner, driver of the offending vehicle.

In above terms, appeal is disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE as

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2022.12.14 19:23:21 IST