Punjab-Haryana High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Manju And Others on 10 January, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
2024:PHHC:002674
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
203
FAO-4542-2019 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 10.01.2024
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. .... Appellant
VERSUS
MANJU & ORS. .... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Mohit Rathee, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)
1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company
challenging the award dated 02.03.2019 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Sonipat (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal').
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.
3. The sole argument raised by the learned counsel for the
appellant is qua the quantum of compensation awarded. Learned counsel for
the appellant would contend that the income of the deceased from business
was assessed as Rs.4,51,405/- on the basis of the Income Tax Returns. It is
further the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the entire
income from the business could not have been taken as the income of the
deceased since the business is still running. Learned counsel for the
integrity of this judgment/order.
203 FAO-4542-2019 (O&M) -2-
appellant would further contend that the income tax ought to have been
deducted after adding future prospects.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 5 has
contended that the claimants have produced the Income Tax Returns
(Exhibits P-5 and P-6) and a person had also been examined from the
Income Tax Department who stepped into the witness box as PW-3 to prove
the said Income Tax Returns. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 5
would further contend that neither any evidence was led to the contrary by
the appellant herein nor any argument was raised before the Tribunal to the
effect that the entire income could not have been treated as income of the
deceased. It is further the contention of the learned counsel for respondents
No.1 to 5 that the calculation has rightly been made by the Tribunal, which
calls for no interference.
5. Heard.
6. In the present case learned counsel for the appellant has argued
that the entire income from the business had been taken as income of the
deceased, however, only a portion of the income ought to have been taken as
the business is still running. On a pointed query by this Court as to whether
this argument was raised before the Tribunal and whether any evidence was
led, learned counsel for the appellant has candidly admitted that neither any
argument was raised nor any evidence was led to this effect. It has also been
candidly admitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that no suggestion
was given to PW-2/widow of the deceased qua the business being still run
by her. In the absence of any evidence and in the absence of even a
integrity of this judgment/order.
203 FAO-4542-2019 (O&M) -3-
suggestion to the widow of the deceased, when she stepped into the witness
box as PW-2, qua the business being run by her, the argument of the learned
counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted. No fault can be found with the
calculations as made by the Tribunal. The compensation has rightly been
assessed by the Tribunal.
7. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present
appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any,
also stand disposed off.
10.01.2024 (ALKA SARIN)
Aman Jain JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this judgment/order.
