Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Anno Devi vs Malkhan Singh on 18 July, 2023
Author: Sunita Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
ON THE 18 th OF JULY, 2023
MISC. APPEAL No. 998 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. ANNO DEVI W/O LATE SHRI NATTHA @
NATTHU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, GRAM
MAHCHANDPURA THANA SARAY CHOLA
PARGANA DIST. MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JHAMMAN SINGH S/O LATE SHRI NATTHA @
NATHU, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
MINOR U/G MOTHER SMT. ANNO DEVI, GRAM
MAHCHANDPUR, THANA SARAY CHOLA,
PARGANA AND JILA MORENA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. JONY S/O LATE SHRI NATTHA @ NATHU, AGED
ABOUT 14 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR U/G
MOTHER SMT. ANNO DEVI GRAM
MAHCHANDPUR, THANA SARAY CHOLA,
PARGANA AND JILA MORENA GRAM
MAHCHANDPUR, THANA SARAY CHOLA,
PARGANA AND JILA MORENA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. BRAJESH S/O LATE SHRI NATTHA @ NATHUR,
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR
U/G MOTHER SMT. ANNO DEVI GRAM
MAHCHANDPUR, THANA SARAY CHOLA,
PARGANA AND JILA MORENA GRAM
MAHCHANDPUR, THANA SARAY CHOLA,
PARGANA AND JILA MORENA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY MS. MEENA SINGHAL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. MALKHAN SINGH S/O SHRI SARDAR SINGH
GRAM KAMRA POST JARAH PARGANA DIST.
MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 20-Jul-23
11:51:23 AM
2
2. MUKESH SINGH S/O SHRI KEDAR SINGH
OCCUPATION: NA GRAM HOLA PURA, POST
HETAMPUR, PARGANA AND JILA MORENA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BRANCH MANAGER CHOLA MANDALAM M S
GENERAL INSURANCE COM. LTD. H-102/C FIRST
FLOOR, METRO TOWER4 54 VIJAY NAGAR
SQUARE A B ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SMT. BATKHA DEVI W/O JASWANT SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NA GRAM
MAHCHANPUR THANA SARAY CHOLA, PARGANA
AND JILA MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. JASWANT SINGH S/O SHRI RAGHUNATH SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NA GRAM
MAHCHANPUR THANA SARAY CHOLA, PARGANA
AND JILA MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(MR. NARESH SINGH TOMAR - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 3 AND
MR. RAM KISHOR SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 5)
T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
Present miscellaneous appeal has been filed against the award dated
07.5.2015 passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena (M.P.)
in Claim Case No. 15/2014.
T he facts in brief to decide the present appeal in short are that the
claimants (appellants and respondents No. 4 and 5 in this appeal) filed a claim
petition before learned claims tribunal for grant of compensation on account of
death of deceased Nattha @ Natthu in a road traffic accident occurred on
15.10.2013 involving Tractor bearing Registration No. RJ-11/RA 4726.
Respondents No. 1 and 2 - Owner and Driver of the offending vehicle
respectively filed their written statement and denied the averments made in the
claim petition and further stated that since offending vehicle was insured with
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 20-Jul-23
11:51:23 AM
respondent No. 3 - insurance company, therefore, insurance company is liable
to pay the compensation amount.
Respondent No. 3 - insurance company filed its written statement and
denied the averments made in the claim petition and further stated that driver of
the offending vehicle did not have valid driving license at the time of accident
and the offending vehicle was being plied in breach of the policy terms and
conditions. Therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay the
compensation.
Learned claims tribunal framed issues and after hearing both the parties
on merits and recording their evidence partially allowed the claim petition of the
claimants and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.9,03,840/- which was
directed to be paid by the respondents jointly and severely.
Learned counsel for the appellants argued that learned claims tribunal has
erred in assessing the income of the deceased on the lesser side as deceased
was a skilled labor and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Learned claims
tribunal has also erred in not awarding any compensation under the head of
"future prospects". Hence, prayed that present appeal be allowed and just and
proper compensation be granted.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurance company opposed
the prayer of the appellants and argued that learned claims tribunal has rightly
passed the award and no interference is warranted in the same.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the available
record.
So far as income of the deceased is concerned, claimants have failed to
produce any documents to prove that deceased was a skilled labor and was
getting Rs.12,000/- per month. Therefore, learned claims tribunal has rightly
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 20-Jul-23
11:51:23 AM
assessed the notional income of the deceased as Rs.4,400/- per month.
However, learned claims tribunal has erred in now awarding any
compensation under the head of "future prospects".
In view of the aforesaid discussion as well as in the light of the case laws
of National Insurance Company vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.; 2017 ACJ 2700
as well as Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &
Ors.; AIR 2009 SC 3104, considering the annual income of the deceased to be
Rs.52,800/-, dependency 3/4th (Rs.52800x3/4=39600), future prospect @ 40%
(39600x40/100=15840), multiplier of 16 [(39600 15840)x16=Rs.8,87,040/-),
Rs.70,000/- in other heads as well as Rs.48,000/- towards medical expenses,
total compensation amount comes to Rs.10,05,040/-.
As such, the total amount awarded to the claimants is enhanced from
Rs.9,03,840/- to Rs.10,05,040/-. The enhanced amount comes to
Rs.1,01,200/- (Rupees One Lakh One Thousand and Two Hundred only),
with interest at the rate as fixed by the tribunal in the award which is directed to
be paid to the claimants by the insurance company in the same apportionment
as directed by the claims tribunal. The enhanced amount of compensation
Rs.1,01,200/- shall be payable to the claimants within 12 weeks from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order. Rest of the award impugned
passed by the Tribunal shall remain intact.
If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the valuation of
appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid) shall be deposited
by the appellants / claimants within four weeks' from today and proof thereof
shall be submitted before the Registry. Thereafter, Registry shall issue the
certified copy of the order passed today.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 20-Jul-23
11:51:23 AM
Appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent and disposed of.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
AKS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 20-Jul-23
11:51:23 AM
