Smt. Mithlesh vs Sanjay Mahor
2022 Latest Caselaw 16658 MP

                                 1
 IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT GWALIOR
                           BEFORE
               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA
                  ON THE 15 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                    MISC. APPEAL No. 4293 of 2019

BETWEEN:-
1.    SMT. MITHLESH W/O LATE MUNSHI LAL, AGE - 35
      YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE.

2.    ANSHUL @ ANSHU MORYA S/O LATE MUNSHI
      LAL, AGE - 12 YEARS,

3.    KU. MUSKAN D/O LATE MUNSHI LAL, AGE - 10
      YEARS (APPELLANTS NO.2 & 3 MINOR THROUGH
      MOTHER SMT. MITHLESH W/O LATE MUNSHI
      LAL), R/O PHAD KA PURA, BANMOR, DISTRICT
      MORENA, AT PRESENT, R/O - LAXMNAPURA,
      THANA PADAV, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
      PRADESH).

                                                           .....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI B.D.VERMA - ADVOCATE )

AND
1.    SANJAY MAHOR S/O SHRI NARAYAN SINGH
      MAHOR,    R/O SIKRODI, THANA BANMORE,
      DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    NATIONAL  INSURANCE    COMPANY LIMITED
      THROUGH       DIVISIONAL     MANAGER,
      JAYENDRAGANJ LASHKAR GWALIOR (MADHYA
      PRADESH).

                                                          .....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI S.N.GAJENDRAGADKAR             -   ADVOCATE   FOR   RESPONDENT
NO.2/INSURANCE COMPANY)

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

This appeal under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been

preferred by the appellants-claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded by Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No.72/2016 vide award dated 14.05.2019.

2. Facts relevant and necessary for disposal of this appeal lie in narrow compass: On 13.04.2015, deceased Munshi Lal, husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellants No.2 and 3 was coming out of Vibha Factory after performing his duty. As soon as he came out of the gate of the factory, at that time, the driver of Motorcycle bearing No.M.P.06/MH-7774 driving the vehicle rashly and negligently hit Munshi Lal, due to which he suffered head injury. Thereafter he was taken to J.A.Hospital through 108 Ambulance, where he was

declared dead by the doctors. After the post mortem, the dead body of Munshi Lal was handed over to the appellants. Report of the accident was made to Police Station Banmore, District Morena, on which a case at Crime No.127/2015 was registered against respondent No.1/driver and vehicle was seized. After investigation challan was filed in the court. Hence, claimants/appellants, wife and children of the deceased filed the claim application before the Claims Tribunal claiming an award of Rs.25,50,000/- as compensation for the death of Munshi Lal.

3. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced their part of evidence. The Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.5,000/- per month and annual income as Rs.60,000/- and since the deceased was of 34 years, therefore, by applying multiplier of 16 and deducting 1/3 towards personal expenses and adding Rs.40,000/- as loss of future earning capacity, assessed total compensation as Rs.8,96,000/-. Besides, under the head of loss of consortium Rs.40,000/-, funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-, loss of

estate Rs.15,000/- and thus total amount of Rs.9,66,000/- has been awarded.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant No.1 is the wife of the deceased Munshi Lal whereas appellants No.2 and 3 are his children. The appellants have challenged the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the ground that income of the appellant is incorrectly assessed by the tribunal. The deceased was working as Welder in Vibha Steel Factory, where he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. In support of the aforesaid, statement of appellant No.1 was recorded whereas no evidence was produced by the respondents. It is further submitted that deceased was a 34 years' old man and had a bright future ahead and further the family of the deceased i.e. wife and two children were totally dependent upon the deceased, therefore, due to his death, they are finding it hard to make both ends meet and since the amount awarded by the claims tribunal is on lower side, therefore, the same deserves to be enhanced. According to the learned counsel, meager amounts have been awarded under the heads; loss of consortium, loss of estate, funeral expenses and instead, under the each head Rs.1,00,000/- should have been awarded. It is submitted that the appeal filed by the appellants be allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced suitably.

5 . Learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company submits

that the amount awarded by learned Tribunal is just and proper. In fact, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017 ACJ 2700 (supra), total amount of Rs.70,000/- can be awarded under various heads and the Tribunal has correctly awarded the same. He supported the award and prays for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Having gone through the evidence adduced by the claimants and after taking into consideration evidence available on record, the amount awarded by the tribunal appears to be on the lower side which deserves to be enhanced. Keeping in view the fact that the deceased was working as Welder in the Factory, the monthly income of deceased can easily be assessed at Rs. 6,500/- per month and Rs.78,000/- per year and as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), minimum 40% should be awarded to the appellants under the head of future prospects (Rs.31,200/- per year), thus the total income comes to Rs.1,09,200/- and after deducting 1/3th towards personal expenses and applying multiplier of 16, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.11,64,800/- (Rs.72,800 x 16 = Rs.11,64,800/-). Besides, the appellants are also entitled for Rs.70,000/- under the various heads according to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, total compensation comes to Rs.12,34,800/-. The Tribunal has already awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.9,66,000/-. Therefore, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to receive the enhanced amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,68,800/- (Rupees Two Lac Sixty Eight Thousand and Eight Hundred only) with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of application. Rest of the conditions as imposed by Claims Tribunal while passing impugned award shall remain intact.

7. So far as the liability of the Insurance Company is concerned, as held by the Tribunal, the Insurance Company shall be liable to pay and recover from the owner of the offending vehicle in the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shamanna & Another vs. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Others (2018) 9 SCC

650. With the aforesaid, appeal stands disposed of. No order as to cost.

(ROHIT ARYA) JUDGE SP

SANJEEV KUMAR PHANSE 2022.12.19 15:55:59 +05'30'