Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Shanta Bai vs Bhagwan Singh on 22 February, 2024
Author: Amar Nath Kesharwani
Bench: Amar Nath Kesharwani
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)
ON THE 22rd OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No.3487 of 2012
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. SHANTA BAI W/O LATE SHRI MAHESH
KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
BIJAURI, TAHSIL AND DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ALOK S/O LATE SHRI MAHESH KUMAR AGED
ABOUT 5 YEARS, MINOR, THROUGH NATURAL
GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. SHANTA BAI W/O LATE
SHRI MAHESH KUMAR R/O VILLAGE BIJAURI,
TAHSIL AND DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ANUS S/O LATE SHRI MAHESH KUMAR AGED
ABOUT 4 YEARS, MINOR, THROUGH NATURAL
GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. SHANTA BAI W/O LATE
SHRI MAHESH KUMAR R/O VILLAGE BIJAURI,
TAHSIL AND DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SURENDRA PATEL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. BHAGWAN SINGH S/O SHRI KESHAR SINGH
ADULT, R/O RASOOLPURA, POST GAWAKHEDI,
TAHSIL ASHTA, DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANURAG SONI
Signing time: 23-02-2024
18:32:36
2
2. MEHARBAN SINGH MEWADA, S/O DEVI SINGH,
ADULT, R/O RASOOLPURA, POST GAWAKHEDI,
TAHSIL ASHTA, DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
BRANCH OFFICE, TAHSIL CHOURAHA, SEHORE,
DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 & 2, THOUGH SERVED)
(MS. ASGHARI KHAN - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3)
....................................................................................................
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
Heard on admission.
Admit.
With the consent of learned counsel for parties, heard final
arguments.
This is an appeal filed by the appellants/claimants under Section
173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated
22/06/2012 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sehore, District
Sehore (M.P.) in MCC No.106/2011. By the impugned award, the learned
Claims Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,18,000/- (Four lakhs
eighteen thousand) with interest @ 6% per annum to the
appellants/claimants for the death of Mahesh Kumar aged about 30 years,
who died in motor vehicle accident. According to claimants i.e.
appellants herein, the compensation awarded by the learned Claims
Tribunal is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced.
2. Since, this Appeal is for the enhancement in the compensation
amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal, hence the question that arises
for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation
awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal on facts and evidence adduced,
is made out and if so to what extent?
3. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how
the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending
vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason
that firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of
appellants/claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, the findings though
recorded in favour of claimants are not under challenge at the instance of
any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either
by way of filing an appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter,
there is no justification to burden this order by detailing facts on all these
issues.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in a motor accident
which took place on 09/07/2011 Mahesh Kumar aged about 30 years died
leaving behind her wife and two children. It is submitted that the learned
Tribunal assessed the income of deceased @ Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand)
per month. Keeping in view the number of dependents, learned tribunal
deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses and looking to the age of
deceased also applied the multiplier of 17 and awarded a sum of
Rs.4,08,000/- (Four lakh eight thousand) towards loss of dependency. It
is submitted that learned Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs.4,18,000/-
(Four lakhs eighteen thousand), breakup of which is as under :-
Rs.4,08,000/- Towards loss of dependency
Rs.10,000/- Towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium
and loss of estate
5. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the
learned tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- (Three
thousand) per month, while the deceased was a skilled labour as at the
time of alleged incident, the deceased was a milkman and also did
agricultural work and earned Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) per month,
so the learned Tribunal committed error in assessing the income of the
deceased as Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand) per month. It is submitted that
even if it is assumed that the deceased was an unskilled labour, then too,
learned Tribunal committed error in assessing the income of the deceased
@ Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand) per month in the year 2011, which should
be at least Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) per month looking to the
documentary evidence available on record. It is also submitted that on
conventional heads also learned tribunal awarded meager amount, which
should be enhanced. Accordingly, it is prayed that the appeal be allowed
and amount of compensation be enhanced substantially.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 submits that the learned
Tribunal after appreciating all the oral and documentary evidence
available on record, passed the impugned award, which requires no
interference. It is prayed. It is prayed that the appeal be dismissed.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record
and gone through the impugned award.
8. Though, claimants claimed that the deceased was a milkman and
engaged in agricultural work, but to prove the said fact, claimants did not
produce any documentary evidence, so it cannot be said that the deceased
was a skilled labour. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of
the case and evidence available on record, it appears that the income of
the deceased assessed by the learned Tribunal as Rs.3,000/- (Three
thousand) per month is on lower side, which should be Rs.4,300/- (Four
thousand three hundred) per month. So far as other findings of the
learned tribunal regarding calculation of amount towards loss of
dependency i.e. multiplier of 17 and deduction of 1/3rd towards personal
expenses, appears to be just and proper looking to the age of deceased
and number of dependents.
9. Thus, considering the monthly income of the deceased @
Rs.4,300/- (Four thousand three hundred) per month, the yearly income
comes to Rs.51,600/- (Fifty one thousand six hundred). Looking to the
number of dependents, 1/3rd is to be deducted towards personal expenses
of the deceased, which comes to Rs.34,400/- (Thirty four thousand four
hundred), thereafter looking to the age of deceased, multiplier of 17 will
be applied for the purpose of computation of amount towards loss of
dependency, which comes to Rs.5,84,800/- (Five lakhs eighty four
thousand eight hundred).
10. From perusal of impugned award, it also appears that on
conventional heads also i.e. funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss
of estate, amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side, which
deserves to be enhanced. In the considered opinion of this Court a sum of
Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) each would be appropriate to be awarded
under the heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate. So far as amount
under the head of loss of consortium is concerned, keeping in view the
judgments passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Janabai wd/o
Dinkarrao Ghorpade vs. ICICI Lombord Insurance Company Ltd.
(2022) 10 SCC 512 and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. vs.
Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130 a sum of
Rs.40,000/- is awarded towards loss of consortium to wife and
Rs.40,000/- (Forty thousand) each is awarded under the head of loss of
consortium to both the children.
11. In view of above discussion, appellants/claimants shall be entitled
for the following amount of compensation :-
Rs.5,84,800/- Towards loss of dependency
Rs.15,000/- Towards funeral expenses
Rs.15,000/- Towards loss of estate
Rs.40,000/- Towards loss of consortium to wife
Rs.80,000/- Towards loss of consortium to 2 children
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rs.7,34,800/- Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Thus, the appellants/claimants will be entitled for a total sum of
Rs.7,34,800/- (Seven lakhs thirty four thousand eight hundred) instead of
Rs.4,18,000/- (Four lakhs eighteen thousand). Thus, there shall be
enhancement to the tune of Rs.3,16,800/- (Three lakhs sixteen thousand
eight hundred), which shall fetch interest @ 6% per annum from the date
of filing of claim petition till the date of actual payment. The enhanced
amount be paid within 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy
of this order. Other terms and condition of the award shall remain intact.
13. It is pertinent to mention here that the appellants have valued the
appeal as Rs.2,00,000/- (Two lakhs) and paid the Court fee as per
valuation, therefore, appellants are directed to pay the Court fees on
additional amount of Rs.1,16,800/- (One lakh sixteen thousand eight
hundred) also within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order. If the Court fee is not paid within the
stipulated period, then this order will be restricted only up to the amount
of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two lakhs).
14. With the aforesaid, appeal stands disposed of.
15. Records of the claims Tribunal be sent back alongwith the copy of
this order for information and necessary compliance.
No order as to costs.
(AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE
as.
