Madhya Pradesh High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Vinod Kumar on 15 November, 2022
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
01
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON TTHE 15th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
MISC. APPEAL No. 674 of 2010
Between:-
1. SMT.SUSHMA SHRIVASTAVA
WD/O LT.UMESH PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA , AGED ABOUT
42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
R/O H.26,CHAMBAL
COL.THATIPUR,GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ADITYA PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA S/O S/O LATE
SHRI UMESH PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA , AGED ABOUT
22 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
R/O H-26 CHAMBAL
COLONY THATIPUR
GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. AWANISH PRAKASH S/O S/O
LATE SHRI UMESH
PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA ,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: R/O H-26
CHAMBAL COLONY
THATIPUR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SMT.CHANDRAKANTA
SHRIVASTAVAW/O LATE
SHRI TRIVANI SHRIVASTAVA
02
, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: R/O H-26
CHAMBAL COLONY
THATIPUR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI ARUN SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
1. ANAND BATHAM S/O S/O DALCHAND
BATHAM , AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER,R/O RAI SIGH
KA BAG,SHINDE KI
CHHAVANI,LASHKAR,GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VINOD KUMAR S/O HUVVALAL
OCCUPATION: OWNER VIKRAM
TEMPO R/O MATAWALI GALI SHINDE
KI CHAVANI LASHKAR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COM.LTD.
JAYENDRA GANJ LASHKAR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI R.P. GUPTA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 AND2
SHRI SHRINIWAS GAJENDRAGADKAR, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.3)
&
MISC. APPEAL No. 732 of 2010
Between:-
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
JAYENDRAGANJ,LASHKAR,GWALIOR,T
H:IT'S DIVISIONAL MANAGAR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
03
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI SHRINIWAS GAJENDRAGADKAR, ADVOCATE FOR
APPELLANT)
AND
1. VINOD KUMAR S/O HUVVALAL
OCCUPATION: OWNER VIKRAM
TEMPO R/O MATAWALI GALI SHINDE
KI CHAVANI LASHKAR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ANAND BATHAM S/O S/O DALCHAND
BATHAM , AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER,R/O RAI SIGH
KA BAG,SHINDE KI
CHHAVANI,LASHKAR,GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT.SUSHMA SHRIVASTAVA
WD/O LT.UMESH PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA , AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: R/O
H.26,CHAMBAL
COL.THATIPUR,GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. ADITYA PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA S/O S/O LATE
SHRI UMESH PRAKASH
SHRIVASTAVA , AGED
ABOUT 22 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: R/O H-26
CHAMBAL COLONY
THATIPUR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. AWANISH PRAKASH S/O S/O
LATE SHRI UMESH
PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA ,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
04
OCCUPATION: R/O H-26
CHAMBAL COLONY
THATIPUR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. SMT.CHANDRAKANTA
SHRIVASTAVAW/O LATE
SHRI TRIVANI SHRIVASTAVA
, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: R/O H-26
CHAMBAL COLONY
THATIPUR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
RESPONDENTS
(SHRI R.P. GUPTA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2
AND SHRI ARUN SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS
NO.3 TO 6
Both these appeals coming on for hearing this day, the
court passed the following:
JUDGMENT
This order shall govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal
Nos.674/2010 and 732/2010.
Being aggrieved by the award passed by the Fourteenth
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Gwalior, in Claim Case
No.02/2009 No.32/2009 on 20.01.2010, appellants/claimants as
well as Insurance Company have filed these appeals.
M.A. No.732/2010 has been filed by the Insurance Company
on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the
tribunal is on higher side and learned Tribunal failed to appreciate
the fact that deceased did not die of the accident involving the
insured vehicle.
After hearing learned counsel for the Insurance Company
and perusing the record, this court is of the opinion that the appeal
filed by the Insurance Company sans merits and is hereby
dismissed.
M.A. No.674/2010 has been filed by the claimants for
enhancement on the ground that learned Claims Tribunal assessed
the income of the deceased as Rs.8635/- per month while he was
earning Rs.9810/- per month. Beside that as per the decision of the
Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay
Sethi as reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, claimants are entitled to
addition of future prospect @ 15% and a sum of Rs.70,000/- under
other heads.
Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has vehemently
opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
appellants.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
income of the deceased is assessed as Rs.9810/- per month, after
deducing Rs.120/- towards income tax and Rs.220/- towards
professional tax, his take home salary is Rs.9470/- per month.
Thus, his annual income would be Rs.1,13,640/-. In the light of the
decision of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants
are entitled to addition of future prospect @ 15%. After addition of
future prospect, the income comes to Rs.1,30,686/- and deduction
of 3/4th of the amount towards loss of dependency, total
dependency of the claimants comes to Rs.98,014/-. Looking to the
age of the deceased, multiplier of 9 will be applicable, thus, total
amount comes to (98014x9) Rs.8,82,126/-. In addition, appellants
are also entitled to Rs.70,000/- towards other heads. Thus, total
amount of compensation comes to Rs.9,52,126/-. The Claims
Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.6,33,720/-.
In view of the forgoing discussion, M.A. No.674/2010
succeeds and is hereby allowed in part. The appellants are held
entitled to receive the enhanced amount of Rs.3,18,406 /-
(Rs.9,52,126/- - 6,33,720/-) in addition to the amount of
compensation already awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The
respondents shall liable to pay enhanced amount of Rs.3,18,406/-
to the claimants. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate
of 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date
of realization.
The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified
to the extent indicated above.
Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
M.A. No.674/2010 is accordingly disposed of.
YOGENDR
A OJHA
2022.11.1
6 10:12:07
+05'30'
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE
ojha
