Tata Aig General Insurance ... vs Lingampalli Ramulu, Adilabad ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1641 Tel

      THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

                 M.A.C.M.A. No. 1097 of 2017

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is preferred by TATA AIG General Insurance

Company Limited, questioning the judgment and decree, dated

07.02.2017 passed in O.P.No. 18 of 2016 on the file of the

Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III

Additional District Judge, Asifabad (for short, the Tribunal).

For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties are

referred to as per their array before the tribunal.

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for

the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicle accident that

occurred on 26.04.2014. According to the claimant, he was

aged 58 years, working as Lineman in underground in Kasipet

mine of Mandamari area of Singareni Collieries Company

Limited and earning Rs.45,000/- per month. On 26.04.2014,

while he was proceeding by walk at Somagudam X road, lorry

bearing No. AP 20TB 7283, being driven by respondent No. 1,

owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent Nos. 3

& 4, came in rash and negligent manner and dashed the

claimant. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained

MGP, J Macma_1097_2017

crush injuries and other injuries all over the body. He was

treated at different hospitals for a considerable period and that

he had incurred Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical expenses.

Therefore, he laid the claim against the respondents who are

driver, owner and the insurance company with whom the crime

vehicle was insured.

Before the Tribunal, while the respondent Nos. 1 & 2,

driver and owner of the lorry stood ex parte, the respondent No.

3-Insurance Company contested the claim denying the

averments of the claim petition and contended that the amount

claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

After considering the claim, counter and the evidence,

both oral and documentary brought on record, the tribunal has

allowed the O.P. in part awarding a sum of Rs.23,99,000/-

towards compensation with interest at 9% thereon to be paid by

the respondents jointly and severally. Hence, the insurance

company filed the present appeal challenging the quantum of

compensation.

Heard both sides and perused the record.

Learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Insurance

Company contends inter alia that as the claimant was

MGP, J Macma_1097_2017

permanent employee, only his unexpired period of service

should have been taken into consideration for assessment of

loss of dependency but not his age and therefore, as the left over

service of the claimant was 1 ½ years, the Tribunal ought to

have applied the multiplier '1.5' but not 5. It is contended that

the determination of loss of earning capacity has to be with

reference to 'all the work' and merely because the claimant was

removed from service, it cannot be construed that he was

completely disabled and in fact, he is capable of doing any other

work. It is lastly contended that the rate of interest awarded by

the tribunal at 9% per annum is on higher side and it should be

restricted to 7.5% per annum.

On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the claimant-respondent No. 1 herein has contended

that the compensation amount granted by the learned Tribunal,

considering the avocation and age of the claimant is reasonable

and needs no interference by this Court. Hence, the learned

counsel prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

It is the main contention of the learned Standing Counsel

for the appellant-Insurance Company that as the left over

service of the claimant, whose employment is permanent in

nature, was 1 ½ years, only the unexpired period of service

MGP, J Macma_1097_2017

should be taken into consideration for assessment of loss of

dependency and not the age of the victim and therefore, the

multiplier has to be applied basing on the residue service of the

claimant. In support of the said submission, reliance is placed

on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in Gita

Mondal and Ors. V. Jagga Singh and Anr1 and the decision of

this Court in MACMA No. 3035 of 2018, dated19.07.2022. It is

to be noted that the facts in those cases are misplaced to the

facts of the case on hand as the present case relates to complete

disablement of claimant on account of injuries suffered by him

in the accident resulting into his removal from service. In fact,

the Tribunal considering the age of the claimant as 57 years,

basing on Ex.A.6, pay slip, after deducting an amount of

Rs.23,860/- towards income tax from the gross salary, fixed the

annual income of the claimant at Rs.4,64,763/-. Considering

his left over service, the Tribunal has applied the multiplier '5'

instead of '9' and has awarded the total loss of income due to

disability on account of injuries at Rs.23,23,815/- apart from

Rs.75,000/- towards pain and agony, totalling to

Rs.23,99,000/-. In fact, no separate amounts under the head

of injury, transportation, extra nourishment etc., have been

awarded by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, this Court is

2016 ACJ 1785

MGP, J Macma_1097_2017

not inclined to disturb the quantum of compensation awarded

by the Tribunal.

Insofar as the rate of interest is concerned, the claimant is

entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum on the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition till realization,

as per the decision of the Apex Court in Rajesh and others v.

Rajbir Singh and others2.

In the result, except the reduction of rate of interest from

9% per annum to 7.5% per annum, the appeal stands dismissed

confirming the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal in O.P. No. 18 of 2016, dated 07.02.2017. There shall

be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand

closed.

_____________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 13.04.2023 Tsr

2 2013 ACJ 1403 = 2013 (4) ALT 35

MGP, J Macma_1097_2017

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

M.A.C.M.A. No. 1097 of 2017

DATE: -04-2023