Punjab-Haryana High Court
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Amandeep Kaur And Ors on 29 April, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
FAO No.924 of 2014 -1- 2024:PHHC:058504
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
104 FAO No.924 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 29.04.2024
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ....Appellant
VERSUS
Amandeep Kaur and Others .....Respondents
104-1 FAO No.6248 of 2015 (O&M)
Amandeep Kaur and Others ....Appellants
VERSUS
Krishan Gopal and Others ....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate
for the appellant-Insurance Company in FAO-924-2014 and
for respondent No.5 in FAO-6248-2015.
Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate
for the claimant-appellants in FAO-6248-2015 and
for respondent Nos.1 to 4 in FAO-924-2014.
Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate
for respondent Nos.5, 7 and 8 in FAO-924-2014 and
for respondent No.1, 3 and 4 in FAO-6248-2015.
Mr. Ravi Gakhar, Advocate
for respondent No.6 in FAO-924-2014 and
for respondent No.2 in FAO-6248-2015.
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
1. This common order will dispose off both the above captioned
appeals being FAO-924-2014 filed by the Insurance Company and FAO-
6248-2015 filed by the claimants challenging the quantum of compensation
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.924 of 2014 -2- 2024:PHHC:058504
awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide award dated 20.11.2013.
2. Since the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by
the Tribunal, are not in dispute, the same are not being reproduced herein for
the sake of brevity. The Tribunal had awarded the following compensation :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly income Rs.9,000/-
2 Annual income [Rs.9,000 x 12] = Rs.1,08,000/-
3 Amount after applying [Rs.1,08,000 - 36,000] = Rs.72,000/-
deduction 1/3rd
4 Future prospects @ 50% [Rs.72,000 + 36,000] = Rs.1,08,000/-
5 Multiplier of 16 [Rs.1,08,000 x 16] = Rs.17,28,000/-
6 Loss of Consortium Rs1,00,000/-
7 Loss of care and guidance Rs.20,000/-
for minor children
8 Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/-
9 Amount of treatment Rs.73,854/-
Total Compensation Rs.19,46,854/-
Interest 7.5% per annum
3. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that
income of the deceased was assessed by the Tribunal as Rs.9,000/- per
month considering the fact that he was running a carpentry shop and would
have been earning Rs.300/- to 400/- per day. There is no evidence coming
forth to show that the deceased was running a carpentry shop and hence the
Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/-.
Even if at best the deceased is taken to be a carpenter, the income of a highly
skilled worker at the relevant time was Rs.5,600/- per month. It is further the
contention that the Tribunal has made an addition of 50% towards loss of
future prospects. The deceased in the present case was 33 years of age and
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.924 of 2014 -3- 2024:PHHC:058504
hence keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.
[(2017) 16 SCC 680], an addition of 40% ought to have been made towards
loss of future prospects of the deceased. It has further been contended that an
amount of Rs.25,000/- has been granted towards funeral expenses of the
deceased. However, as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
cases of Pranay Sethi (supra) and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs.
Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021(4) RCR
(Civil) 642], the claimants would be entitled to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20%
increase) towards funeral expenses. It is further the contention the amount
awarded under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not in accordance with
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, no challenge
has been laid by learned counsel for the Insurance Company to deduction
towards personal expenses of the deceased and the multiplier applied by the
Tribunal.
4. Per contra learned counsel for the claimants would contend that
the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/-
on the basis of evidence produced on the record. It has been contended that
no amount has been awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of estate and that
the amount awarded under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not in
accordance with the law. No challenge has been laid by learned counsel for
the claimants to deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased,
addition towards loss of future prospects and the multiplier applied by the
Tribunal.
5. Heard.
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.924 of 2014 -4- 2024:PHHC:058504
6. The Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased
as Rs.9,000/- per month. There is no evidence produced on the record to
show that the deceased was running a carpentry shop earning Rs.9000/- per
month, except for the statement of his father, who himself was working as a
carpenter. The Tribunal taking into account the fact that the father of the
deceased was a carpenter held that possibility of the deceased being a
carpenter cannot be ruled out. However, even if the deceased is taken to be a
carpenter the minimum wages prevailing at the relevant time for a highly
skilled worker was Rs.5,600/- per month and hence the income of the
deceased is taken as Rs.5,600/- per month. Further, the deceased was 33
years of age at the time of accident and the Tribunal has made an addition of
50% towards loss of future prospects, which ought to have been 40% in
view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pranay
Sethi (supra). Under the conventional heads, the claimants would be entitled
to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and
Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses as per the
law laid down in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra) and N. Jayasree (supra).
The claimants, who are widow, son and parents of the deceased, would also
be entitled to Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of
consortium. The amount of Rs.73,854/- awarded by the Tribunal towards
medical treatment of the deceased is maintained.
7. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly income Rs.5,600/-
2 Annual income [Rs.5,600 x 12] = Rs.67,200/-
3 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.67,200 - 22,400] = Rs.44,800/-
4 Future prospects @ 40% [Rs.44,800 + 17,920] = Rs.62,720/-
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.924 of 2014 -5- 2024:PHHC:058504
5 Multiplier of 16 [Rs.62,720 x 16] = Rs.10,03,520/-
6 Loss of estate Rs.18,000/-
7 Funeral expenses Rs.18,000/-
8 Loss of Consortium :
(i) Filial [Rs.48000 x 2] = Rs.96,000/-
(ii) Spousal Rs.48,000/-
(iii) Parental Rs.48,000/-
(Total Rs.1,92,000/-)
9 Medical treatment as Rs.73,854/-
awarded by the Tribunal
Total Compensation Rs. 13,05,374/-
8. In view of the above discussion, the impugned award of the
Tribunal is modified; the appeal being FAO-924-2014 filed by the Insurance
Company is allowed and the appeal being FAO-6248-2015 filed by the
claimants stands disposed off with the above modification. Pending
applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
( ALKA SARIN )
29.04.2024 JUDGE
jk
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment
