For vs For
2023 Latest Caselaw 232 Tri

                                    Page 1 of 1




                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                         _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
                            MAC. App. No.15 of 2022
                               Connected with
                             CO(FA) No.09 of 2022
For Appellant(s)        :   Mr. S. Debnath, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)       :   Mr. A. Acharjee, Advocate.

Mr. A. Tilak Paul, Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) _O_ R_ D_ E_ R_ 23/03/2023 Heard.

With regard to the enhancement of the award, this Court finds that there is no infirmity and hence, the prayer seeking enhancement of the awarded amount cannot be considered. Insofar as, the appeal has been filed by the insurance company is concerned, the insurance company has claimed that on the strength of the Hon'ble Apex Court's judgments reported in 2013(10) SCC 695 and 2014 (2) SCC 735, wherein, it has been held that if there is no proof of monthly income Rs.6,500/- has been fixed and that too, in a case of a skilled labour therein the deceased was a driver and in the present case, the deceased is a Rickshaw puller and as per the evidence of PW-1, the monthly income of the deceased was assessed at Rs.12,000-15,000/-, which appears to be unreasonable and there is no proof of income filed by them. Hence, it cannot be considered as monthly income in the light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court.

With regard to the other issues, the insurance company also aggrieved by the order of the Court below. Insofar as the issue of salary is concerned, the counsel appearing for the claimants has requested for an adjournment before this Court for placing any judgment, in support of his case.

Request considered.

Let these matters be listed on 24.03.2023, for hearing.

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

A. Ghosh