Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Lachho Bai vs Union Of India on 27 October, 2022
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 27th OF OCTOBER, 2022
MISC. APPEAL No. 3725 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. LACHHO BAI W/O KISHORE KUMAR
VERMA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSE WIFE R/O. QTR. NO. 42/1, MANDIR
COLONY C.O.D. THANA RANJHI DISTT.
JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT PINKI VERMA W/O CHANDRA KUMAR
VERMA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, QUARTER NO
42/1 MANDIR COLONY COD THANA RANJHI,
DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. YOGESH KUMAR S/O KISHORE KUMAR
VERMA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOTHING QUARTER NO 42/1 MANDIR COLONY
COD THANA RANJHI, DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. KU BHARTI VERMA D/O KISHORE KUMAR
VERMA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, QUARTER NO
42/1 MANDIR COLONY COD THANA RANJHI,
DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SMT JAYA BAI W/O LATE SUNDERLAL VERMA,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, QUARTER NO 42/1
MANDIR COLONY COD THANA RANJHI,
DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI S.R.PATEL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THR. MILITRARY TRANSPORT
OFFICER CENTRE ARMS
BHANDARAN/COLLECTION POST BOX NO. 20,
PIN 908772, RANJHI DIST. JABALPUR (M.P.)
Signature Not Verified
SAN (MADHYA PRADESH)
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2022.10.27 18:49:19 IST 2. UNION BANK OF INDIA THROUGH SEC.
DEFENCE MINISTRY NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2
3. BARELAL SHARMA S/O ASHARAM SHARMA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WIRE GOD 390 DSC
LINE COD, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(MS. AYUSHI GUPTA - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.1)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard on I.A.No.4149/2021, an application seeking deletion of name of
appellant No.5-Smt. Jaya Bai.
2. On due consideration, so also the reasons assigned in the application, the
same is allowed. Name of appellant No.5-Smt. Jaya Bai be deleted.
3. This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved of award dated
11.10.2017, passed by learned 7 t h Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Jabalpur (M.P.), in MVC No.209/2015, on two grounds, namely, deceased
Kishore Kumar Verma was working as carpenter in Military Engineering
Services and, thus, by virtue of a permanent employee and taking into
consideration his age which is accepted by the trial Court to be 57 years, 15%
addition is to be made towards towards future prospects in terms of the
provisions contained in the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi [(2016) 6 SCC
680 para (59.3)]. Besides this, it is submitted that three of the children of the
deceased are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each for the loss of parental
consortium in the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Satinder Kaur [2020 SCC
Online (SC) 410].
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2022.10.27 18:49:19 IST 4. Ms. Ayushi Gupta, in her turn, submits that the law laid down by Hon'ble
Supreme Court that the judgment rendered by Supreme Court in Sarla Verma
will have a precedential value and no future prospects is admissible for a person
aged above 50 years in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi (supra).
5. Ms. Ayushi Gupta, when confronted that in which paragraph of the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), it is mentioned
that no future prospect is admissible above the age of 50 years, she admits that
she had made an incorrect arguments.
6. This practice of making incorrect arguments without referring to the
concerned judgment is not a healthy practice for the growth of the bar of this
High Court. She tenders her apology. Her apology is accepted.
7. Therefore, taking the submissions made by Shri Vinit Mishra into
consideration, when learned Claims Tribunal has accepted net income of the
deceased after deduction at Rs.2,00,916/- per annum, then 15% is to be added
towards future prospects and then multiplier of 9 will be applied, that will take
total pecuniary compensation to Rs.20,79,481/- against a sum of Rs.19,33,244/-
. Thus, there will be enhancement to the tune of Rs.1,46,237/- under the head
of pecuniary compensation. Besides this, three children will be entitled to a
sum of Rs.1,20,000/- under the head of loss of parental consortium. However,
learned Claims Tribunal has arbitrarily awarded a sum of Rs.1,35,000/- under
the head of loss of consortium and last rites against Rs.70,000/- made
admissible by Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in case of Pranay Sethi
(supra). Thus, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded an additional sum of
Rs.55,000/- which needs to be reduced. Thus, net increase will be to the tune
Signature Not Verified
SAN
of Rs.2,11,237/- to which claimants will be entitled to in addition to the amounts
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2022.10.27 18:49:19 IST
awarded by learned Claims Tribunal. This, additional amount will earn interest
@ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till the date of
actual payment.
8. In above terms appeal is disposed of.
9. Record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
A.Praj.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2022.10.27 18:49:19 IST
