[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Arjun on 20 January, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:1695
1 MA-8712-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 20th OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. APPEAL No. 8712 of 2025
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
Versus
ARJUN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manoj Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Sodan Nayak - Advocate for respondents no.1 and 2.
ORDER
This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company against the award dated 10.09.2025 passed by II Additional
Member, MACT, Sarangpur, district Rajgarh in Claim Case No.19/2022
whereby award of Rs.17,26,440/- along with interest has been awarded to the
survivors (brothers) of the deceased Arvind.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.12.2020 at about 10:30
P.M. the deceased Arvind was travelling in Truck bearing registration
No.MP-09-HH-4214 in the capacity of cleaner and was coming to Indore
and when he reached Highway 47 of ahead of village Gundirela at the turn of
Machiliya Ghat, the aforesaid truck driven rashly and negligently by the
driver turned turtle due to which the truck fell down in the trench resulting in
serious injuries to the deceased Arvind and he died on the spot. The incident
was reported to the Police Station Rajgarh and case was registered vide
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:1695
2 MA-8712-2025
Crime No.03/2021 for offence under Sections 279, 304-A of IPC. The
claimants filed the claim petition for award of claim amount due to untimely
accidental death of deceased Arvind who was bachelor on the date of
accident.
3. Counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submits that learned
Claims Tribunal has failed in appreciating the income of the deceased which
is on the higher side and award amount is also on the higher side. The
deduction in the head of personal expenses should be half as per direction
contained in para 31 in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 as deceased was bachelor. The
other contention raised on behalf of the Insurance Company is that the
claimants are major brothers of the deceased and having their own income
therefore, they were not entitled for any amount of compensation. On these
grounds prays for reduction of the compensation amount by allowing the
appeal.
4. Counsel for the respondent/claimants submits that the learned
Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation amount, therefore, no
interference is called for in the impugned award. He further submits that the
award has been passed taking into account all the prevailing judgments
wherein directions have been given with regard to assessing income,
applying multiplier and other heads. He further submits that the award
amount should be enhanced as nothing has been awarded in the head of filial
consortium and the amount awarded in the head of funeral expenses and loss
of estate is meagre amount which should have been Rs.16,500/- in each head
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:1695
3 MA-8712-2025
as per directions contained in the case of National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. On
these submissions he prays for dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the
Insurance Company and also enhancing the amount in the head of filial
consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate.
5. Heard the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the record.
6. It is not in dispute that on the date of accident, the deceased was
20 years of age and was a bachelor and as per directions contained in the
case of Smt. Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in
(2009) 6 SCC 121 in the head of personal expenses half of the income
should be deducted unless otherwise evidence is on record and in the instant
case no such evidence has been given, therefore, in the head of personal
expenses, half of the income will be deducted. It has been held in catena of
judgements by the Apex Court that even major brothers of the bachelor
deceased can claim compensation. Therefore, the contention raised on behalf
of the Insurance Company in this behalf is not sustainable. As far as filial
consortium is concerned, both the brothers are entitled for that as per the
directions in the case of Pranay Sethi (Surpa) . In para 59.8 in the case of
Pranay Sethi (Surpa) taking year 2017 as the base year, 10% of the amount
of Rs.40,000/- which was initially awarded in the head of consortium will be
enhanced. Similarly in the head of funeral expenses and loss of estate, the
amount has already been awarded by the Claims Tribunal. In the head of
consortium an amount of Rs.44,000/- to each brother comes to Rs.88,000/-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:1695
4 MA-8712-2025
to be added.
7. In the light of the aforesaid the just and proper amount of
compensation will be computed as under:-
Rs.8,400/- + 40% (FP) less 1/2 x12 x 18 =
Dependency
Rs.12,70,080/-
Filial Consortium Rs.88,000/-(44,000 x 2)
Funeral Rs.16,500/-
Loss of Estate Rs.16,500/-
Total Rs.13,91,080/-
Rs.17,26,440/- less Rs.13,91,080/-
Total difference
=Rs.3,35,360/-
Total Rs.3,35,360/- proposed to be reduced
8. Accordingly, the award amount is reduced by Rs.3,35,360/-. The
other terms and conditions as mentioned in the award shall remain intact.
With the aforesaid appeal is allowed and disposed off.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
RJ
