Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Aruna Shukla vs Ramawtar Patel on 13 October, 2022
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 13th OF OCTOBER, 2022
MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 1138 of 2014
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. ARUNA SHUKLA W/O LATE SHRI SITASARAN
SHUKLA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NAWAGAU
UNMOOLA P.S. MANGAWAN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. RESHMI SHUKLA D/O SHRI SITARAM SHUKLA,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, NAWAGAU UNMOOLAN P S
MANGAWAN REWA DISTT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. AKASH SHUKLA S/O SHRI SITASARAN SHUKLA,
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, NAWAGAU UNMOOLAN P S
MANGAWAN REWA DISTT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI ASHOK SINGH - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAMAWTAR PATEL S/O SHRI YAGYASEN PATEL
VILL RERUA P.S.GURH, REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. RAJEEV KUMAR PATEL S/O SHRI CHHOTELAL
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, BADIKUIYA P S
MANGAWAN DISTT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., SIRMAUR
CHOWK, REWA, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI KRISHNA KESHAV SINGH - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.3)
This appeal coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:
Signature Not Verified
SAN ORDER
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2022.10.14 19:29:00 IST
Heard on I.A. No.7577 of 2014, an application under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Shri Ashok Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is a
delay of six months in filing the appeal.
Appeal is filed being aggrieved of award dated 22.07.2013, whereas appeal
was filed on 11.05.2014.
For the reasons stated in the application duly supported by affidavit of the
claimants, delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Also heard on I.A. No.12208 of 2022, an application seeking permission to
amend the valuation and accordingly to pay Court fee.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he has paid deficit court fee
of Rs.12,500/- and in support of the said submission he has filed a copy of Online
Court Fee Cyber Receipt along with the application, therefore, the Court fee may be
taken on record.
On due consideration, I.A. No.12208 of 2022 is allowed and the Court fee is
taken on record.
This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved of award dated
22.07.2013 passed by the learned Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Rewa in claim case No.91/2012 on two grounds, namely, Tribunal should have
made 1/4th deduction towards living expenses and not 1/3rd as has been made by it.
Secondly, it is submitted that Tribunal has deducted 30% income tax, whereas
income tax should have been deducted as per the income tax slab applicable on the
date of the accident.
Signature Not Verified
Shri Krishna Keshav Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.3-
SAN
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2022.10.14 19:29:00 IST
Insurance company supports the award.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it
has come in para 17 of the award that deceased, who was working as Assistant
Teacher (LDT) was drawing salary to the tune of Rs.22,269/- per month or
Rs.,2,67,228/- per annum.
As far as income tax deduction is concerned, as per the income tax slab for
the assessment year 2012-13 i.e. financial year 2011-12, rates of income tax were as
follows:-
(a) Income upto Rs.1,80,000/- was exempted from payment of
income tax.
(b) Thereafter, 10% income tax was payable upto Rs.5,00,000/-.
Therefore, 10% income tax is to be deducted on a sum of Rs.87,228/- which
is in excess of the exempted limit of Rs.1,80,000/-, which comes out to Rs.8,723/-.
Therefore, when income tax payable is deducted, then net annual income comes out
to Rs.2,58,505/-.
As per law laid down by the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and
others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 ,
since deceased is survived by three legal heirs namely wife and two children,
deduction of 1/3rd is justified and there is no substance in the arguments putforth by
Shri Ashok Singh that 1/4 th deduction should have been made. 1/4th deduction is
admissible in case deceased is survived by 4-6 legal heirs.
Therefore, when 1/3rd deduction is made towards living expense of the
deceased, then net dependency will come to Rs.1,72,337/-. Over and above which
30% is to be added towards Future Prospects in terms of law laid down by the
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017)
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2022.10.14 19:29:00 IST
16 SCC 680 as admittedly on the date of the accident, age of the deceased was
about 44 years, taking pecuniary compensation to Rs.2,24,038/-. Multiplier of 14
will be applicable which will take pecuniary compensation to Rs.31,36,532/-. Over
and above which claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/- under the head
of non-pecuniary compensation and another sum of Rs.80,000/- to the claimants
No.2 and 3 for Loss of Parental Consortium in the light of judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur, 2020 SC Online SC 410 , taking total
compensation to the tune of Rs.32,86,532/- against a sum of Rs.23,45,976/-
awarded by learned Claims Tribunal. Thus, there will be enhancement to the tune of
Rs.9,40,556/- to which claimants will be entitled to in addition to the amount
awarded by learned Claims Tribunal. This additional amount will also earn interest
@ 9% per annum, as has been awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal, from the
date of filing of claim petition till the date of actual payment.
This additional amount will remain invested in the F.D.R. of either Indian Post
Office or a nationalized bank for a period of five years and will not be permitted to
be withdrawn under any circumstance by the Tribunal or the Executing court.
In above terms, this miscellaneous appeal is disposed of.
Record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
pp
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2022.10.14 19:29:00 IST
