Smt. Geetabai vs Madanlal on 10 March, 2026

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282




                                                               1                               MA-743-2017
                              IN      THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                         BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                                   ON THE 10th OF MARCH, 2026
                                                   MISC. APPEAL No. 743 of 2017
                                                  SMT. GEETABAI AND OTHERS
                                                            Versus
                                                   MADANLAL AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                                    Shri Pourush Ranka - Advocate for the appellants/claimants.

                                    Shri Sudarshan Pandit, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

                                                                   ORDER

With consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is finally heard.

02. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants (survivors) of the deceased - Samrath, being aggrieved by the award dated 24.1.2017 passed in MACC No.53/2013 by the Vth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur, whereby a total sum of Rs.4,15,000/- has been awarded to the

claimants by way of compensation with interest.

03. The facts of the claim petition are that on 26.2.2012 at about 8.30 PM deceased Samrath was going with appellants No.1 and 2 in the Tempo bearing registration No.M.P. 14 T 0601 from Mandsaur to his village Bhukhi. The deceased was sitting by the side of the gate of the tempo and respondent No.1 was driving the offending vehicle rashly and negligently

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282

2 MA-743-2017 and resulted in accident and deceased suffered grievous injuries and eventually died out of the said accident. Deceased was aged about 33 years. The accident was reported to the police station Nahargarh, Mandsaur and offence was registered at Crime No.62/2012 under Section 279, 337 and 304- A of IPC and thereafter the claim petition was filed claiming compensation. Upon evaluation of the evidence brought on record by the parties the Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation to the appellants to the tune of Rs.4,15,000/- for untimely unexpected death of the deceased Samrath with the stipulation that the Insurance Company is not liable for payment of compensation.

04. Learned counsel for the appellants relying upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali vs.

Shyam Kishore Murmu, reported as AIR Online 2021 SC 1029 submits that even if driver was not having valid and effective driving license on the date of accident, then in the cases of third party Insurance Company is liable and principle of pay and recover should have applied which has been ignored by the learned claims tribunal and the Insurance Company has wrongly been exonerated from the payment of compensation, therefore, he prays for setting aside the aforesaid finding of the learned claims tribunal and fastening liability on the Insurance Company by invoking the principle of pay and recover.

05. He further submits that as per table annexed in 2nd Schedule under Section 163-A the person in the age group of 35 to 40 years and having income of Rs.36,000/- per annum will be awarded Rs.5,40,000/- whereas in

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282

3 MA-743-2017 the instant case the amount awarded is only Rs.4,08,000/- which is on lower side therefore, prays for enhancement in accordance with the table in the awarded amount. On these submissions, learned counsel for the appellants prays for allowing the appeal.

06. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 / Insurance Company submits that amount of compensation has properly been assessed and it needs no enhancement and even no effective driving license with the driver of the offending vehicle hence Insurance Company could not have been settled with the liability and the same has been done by the claims tribunal therefore, the findings cannot be said to be erroneous. On these contentions, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

07. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

08. As far as the assessment of compensation amount is concerned, this Court is of the view that it has been discussed in para 28 of the impugned award and it is just and proper and no interference is required hence the arguments advanced in this behalf by the learned counsel for the appellants are hereby repealed.

09. As far as the liability of the Insurance Company is concerned, the finding in this regard has been given in para 35 of the impugned award which appears erroneous in the teeth of judgment of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants/claimants. In the aforesaid judgment para 17 in the similar factual matrix it has been directed that Insurance Company will pay first the amount

awarded to the claimants and then recover the same from the owner and

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282

4 MA-743-2017 driver of the offending vehicle. Relevant para 17 of the judgment of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali reads as under :-

"17. Accordingly, the appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- (Rs. four lakhs seventy thousand only) towards total compensation with interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realization. The enhanced compensation shall be apportioned between the appellants as ordered by the Tribunal. The entire compensation shall be paid to the appellants by respondent No.2 - Insurance Company, and we keep it open to the Insurance Company to recover the same from respondent No.1 - owner of the motorcycle by initiating appropriate proceedings as the motorcycle was driven by the driver who was not possessing valid driving licence on the date of accident."

10. Thus the findings of the learned claims tribunal in para 35 with regards to the exonerating the Insurance Company is hereby set aside and it is held that the principle of pay and recover will be applicable and Insurance Company will pay the awarded amount to the claimants first and then recover the same from the owner and driver.

11. The last point which has been argued on behalf of the claimants is that consortium amount should have been awarded as per the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., (2017) 16 SCC 680 and the same view has been taken in para 16 of the aforesaid judgment Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali (supra) which reads as under :-

"16. In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to take notional income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/- (Rs. twenty five thousand only) per annum. Accordingly, when the notional income is multiplied with applicable multiplier '15', as prescribed in Scheduled II for the claims under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it comes to Rs.3,75,000/- (Rs.25,000/- x Multiplier 15) towards loss of dependency. The appellants are also entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus the appellants are

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282

5 MA-743-2017 entitled to the following amounts towards compensation. (1) Loss of Dependency : Rs.3,75,000-00 (b) Filial Consortium (Rs.40,000/- x 2) : Rs.80,000-00 (c) Funeral Expenses :

Rs.15,000-00 Total : Rs.4,70,000-00"

12. From the perusal of the aforesaid, it is apparent that Hon'ble the Apex Court has applied guidelines as given in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) para 59.8 with regards to funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of estate.

13. Counsel for the appellants/claimants has submitted that though the application was under section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Kurvan Ansari V Shyam Kishore (supra), they are entitled to for loss of consortium of Rs. 40,000/- each and Rs 15000/- under the head of funeral expenses and loss of estate independently.

14. Considering the argument of the counsel for the claimants in the light of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgments Kurvan Ansari V Shyam Kishore (supra) and Pranay Sethi (supra), it is clear that the claimants are entitled for Rs.40,000/- each under the head of loss of consortium and hence Rs.2,00,000/- totally under the said head is awarded and Rs.15000/- for loss of estate and another Rs.15000/- is awarded under funeral expenses. It is seen from the impugned award that Rs.2000/- is awarded for funeral expenses and Rs 5000/- is awarded for loss of consortium and hence this total Rs.7000/- will be deducted from total amount of Rs.2,30,000/- and accordingly the enhancement comes to Rs.2,23,000/-. Hence, now the total compensation comes to Rs.6,38,000/- and the respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the same within thirty days with liberty to recover it from the owner

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6282

6 MA-743-2017 and driver of the offending vehicle.

15. The appeal is valued at Rs.1,00,000 and court fees is paid upon it and hence the appellants are directed to pay the court fees on further enhanced amount of Rs 1,23,000/- within period of 30 days, failing which they will not be entitled to claim interest upon the enhanced amount.

16. With the aforesaid observations, the present appeal is allowed in part and disposed off.

17. The other terms and conditions of the award including interest rate will remain intact and applicable on the enhanced amount also.

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE

SS/-