Durwas @ Durwasa vs Brajesh Pandey
2022 Latest Caselaw 12201 MP

                          1

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                AT GWALIOR
                      BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
        ON THE 13th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

            MISC. APPEAL No. 3074 of 2020

Between:-

THE    NATIONAL   INSURANCE
THROUGH       ITS     SENIOR
DIVISIONAL MANAGER CO. LTD.
HAVING BRANCH OFFICE AT M.S.
ROAD,     MORENA,    HAVING
DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT S.D.M.
ROAD, DNDARGANJ, GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)


                                        ........APPELLANT

(BY SHRI SHRINIWAS GAJENDRAGADKAR - ADVOCATE)

AND

1.DURWAS @ DURWASA S/O
MATADEEN    SHARMA,    AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST         GRAM
MUNJBANDHA,       PRESENTLY
RESIDING  AT   LANE   ROAD,
AMBAH, (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.  MATADEEN             S/O
KANHAIRAM, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS,          OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST         GRAM
                            2

    MUNJBANDHA,       PRESENTLY
    RESIDING  AT   LANE   ROAD,
    AMBAH, (MADHYA PRADESH)

    3.   BRIJESH PANDAY S/O RAMAUTAR
    PANDAY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, WARD
    NO.14 BEHIND POLICE LINE AMBAH,
    (MADHYA PRADESH)

    4.    SANJAY PANDAY S/O RAMAUTAR
    PANDAY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WARD
    NO.14,BEHIND POLICE LINE, AMBAH
    (MADHYA PRADESH



                                        ........RESPONDENTS

     (BY SHRI B.D VERMA- ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS
NO.1 TO 2)

                               AND

              MISC. APPEAL No. 505 of 2021


    BETWEEN:-



   DURWAS @ DURWASA S/O SHRI MATADEEN SHARMA, AGED ABOUT
1. 20 YEARS, GRAM GUNJ BANDHA HAL NIWASI LEN ROAD AMBAH
   (MADHYA PRADESH)

   MATADEEN S/O KANHAIRAM, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
2. OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE GUNJ BANDHA, AT
   PRESENT LEN ROAD AMBAH (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                ........APPELLANTS
    (BY SHRI B.D. VERMA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                                            3



   BRAJESH PANDEY S/O SHRI RAMAVTAR PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 24
1. YEARS, WARD NO. 14 POLICE LINE KE PICHE ANGBAH (MADHYA
   PRADESH)

   SANJAY PANDEY S/O RAMAVTAR PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
2. WARD NO. 14, POLICE LINE KE PICHHE AMBAH (MADHYA
   PRADESH)

   NATIONAL  INSURACNE  COMPANY    LTD   THR.  SHAKHA
3. PRABANDHAK JYENDRAGANJ JYENDRAGANJ LASHKAR (MADHYA
   PRADESH)




                                                        ..........RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI S GAJENDRAGADKAR - RESPONDENT NO.3 )


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the

following:

                                   JUDGMENT

Being aggrieved by the award passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri, in Claim Case No.100011/2016 on

03.02.2020 Insurance Company as well as claimants have preferred these

two appeals which are being disposed of by this common order.

The Insurance Company preferred this appeal (M.A.3074/2020) on

the ground that at the time of accident age of the deceased was 45 years.

Learned Tribunal assessed future prospects as 30% but it should be 25%

in the light of National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi,2017. It

is also argued that learned Tribunal levied interest as 7.5% which is on

higher side. It is also argued by the counsel for the Insurance Company

that F.I.R. is against unknown person. After registration of F.I.R. during

investigation, offending vehicle was seized. Thereafter, charge-sheet has

been submitted. In reubuttal, the Insurance Company has not produced

any evidence.

Appellants/claimants have preferred this appeal (M.A.505/2021)

and argued that learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased

who was house wife and the income assessed as Rs.3000/- rupees which

is on lower side.

Arguments of both the advocates heard.

Perused the record.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be

appropriate to assess the income of the deceased as Rs.4000/- in place of

Rs.3000/-, as assessed by the learned Claims Tribunal. Thus, her annual

salary would be Rs.48,000/-. The deceased was married and there were

two dependents on her income therefore, 1/3 rd of her income is to be

deducted towards her personal expenses. Thus, dependency of the

claimants would be Rs.32,000/-.

As per the law at the time of accident deceased was 45 years. In the

light of the judgment of National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi,

2017 there should be addition of 25% of future prospects. Thus, after

addition of future of prospect total amount comes to Rs.40,000/-. If

multiplier of 14 applied as applied by the Claims Tribunal then total

amount comes to Rs.5,60,000/-. Beside that claimants will be entitled to

a sum of Rs. 70,000/-.(for loss of consortium, lost of estate and funeral

expenses). Thus total amount of compensation comes to Rs.6,30,000/-

which the claimants will be entitled to receive from respondents No.1 to

3 (driver, owner and Insurance Company) jointly and severally with

interest @ 6 % from the date of filing of this appeal. The Claims Tribunal

awarded a sum of Rs.4,91,800/- Thus, claimants are further entitled to

compensation of Rs.1,38,200/-. Rest of the terms and conditions of the

award shall remain as it is.

With the aforesaid, both the Misc, Appeals are disposed of.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE

mani

SUBASRI MANI 2022.09.14 18:45:53

-07'00'