Oriental Insurance Company ... vs Sherry And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 7297 P&H

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
122
                                              FAO-1811-2022 (O&M)
                                           Date of decision: 20.07.2022

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.                                  .....Appellant

                                 Versus

Sherry and another                                         .....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present :   Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.

                                   ****

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

The insurance company is impugning the award passed by

learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (for short, 'the

Tribunal') vide judgment and decree dated 12.01.2022 wherein the

following compensation was awarded to respondent No.1/claimant on

account of death of Kangna Suri Verma in a motor vehicular accident

which took place on 17.02.2020:-

 Sr.                      Head                             Amount
 No.
1.     Annual Income                              Rs.4,00,000/-
2.     Future Prospects (40%)                     Rs.1,60,000/-
3.     Total Income                               Rs.5,60,000/-
4.     Income Tax deducted                        Rs.18,500/-
5.     Annual Income after deducing tax           Rs.5,41,500/-

6. Deduction towards personal expenses Rs.2,70,750/-

(1/2)

7. Dependency of the claimant Rs.2,70,750/-

9. Compensation after applying multiplier Rs.46,02,750/-

10.    Loss of consortium                         Rs.44,000/-
11.    Loss of estate                             Rs.16,500/-
12.    Funeral expenses                           Rs.16,500/-
       Total compensation                         Rs.46,79,750/-



                                 1 of 3

 FAO-1811-2022 (O&M)                                                 -2-

Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company has

vehemently argued that the compensation awarded vide impugned

judgment and decree wherein the entire liability was fastened upon the

insurance company was illegal and thus liable to be set aside. It was

submitted that in fact it was the deceased herself who was rash and

negligent while riding her scooty and had hit the offending tractor-

trolley. He further submitted that PW4 Hemant Sharma on the face of it

was a planted witness which was evident from the fact that he failed to

give a satisfactory account as to the manner in which the accident in

question had taken place. It was submitted that the presence of PW4

Hemant Sharma at the spot was clearly in doubt as the FIR which was

registered subsequent to the accident in question was against an

unknown tractor-trolley. It was also submitted that the Tribunal had

awarded an exorbitant amount of compensation by assessing the

income of the deceased at Rs.4 lakhs per annum on CTC basis whereas

it should have been on actual payment basis. Learned counsel submitted

that the claimant was the husband of the deceased and himself earning a

handsome salary, hence, should not have been taken as a dependent of

the deceased.

I have heard learned counsel and perused the relevant

material on record including the impugned judgment and decree.

The contention of the learned counsel qua PW4 Hemant

Sharma being a planted witness is devoid of any merit. He was cross-

examined at length, however, the appellant/insurance company failed to

create any dent in his deposition. His presence at the relevant time of

the accident and the place of accident cannot be disbelieved as

2 of 3

FAO-1811-2022 (O&M) -3-

admittedly he is a Government contractor and had been allotted the

work of fixing tiles on footpaths in Sectors 25, 26, 27 and 28 of

Panchkula. He was returning home after work and was in close vicinity

when he witnessed the accident. Still further, CCTV footage of the

place of occurrence which was produced before the Tribunal

corroborated the ocular testimony of PW4 Hemant Sharma.

Coming to the next contention of the learned counsel that

the compensation awarded was excessive and deserved to be scaled

down is also bereft of any merit. The deceased was a 27 years old lady,

who was working with Mobile Programming India Pvt. Ltd. as IT

Recruiter on a salary of Rs.4 lakhs. Enough evidence in the shape of

salary bills etc. of the deceased was produced and proved before the

Tribunal qua her salary of being Rs.33,335/- per month.

This Court, therefore, does not find any error in the

impugned judgment and decree which is in consonance with the settled

ratio of law as laid down in National Insurance Co. Vs. Pranay Sethi :

2017 SCC 270; Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation

& Anr. : (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, 2018(4) RCR (Civil)

333.

Dismissed.

20.07.2022                                 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Vinay                                             JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                 3 of 3