Allowed

Meena Devi and Others v. Smt. Ramwati and Others

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2018FAFO/1112/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed appeal against Motor Accident Claim Tribunal's award of 1995 applying Supreme Court directions on multiplier for deceased aged 26-30 years, increasing multiplier from 12 to 17 and awarding a total additional sum of Rs.1,09,200 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Modified judgment and decree to award additional sum of Rs. 1,09,200 representing future income with interest at 9% from filing of claim petition and 6% thereafter.

Meena Devi and Others Vs Smt. Ramwati and Others — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1112 of 1995

¶3

Appellant :- Meena Devi & Others Respondent :- Smt. Ramwati & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Madhav Jain

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

¶5

This appeal at the behest of the claimants has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 1.8.1995 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/XV Additional District Judge, Agra (herein after referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C. Case No.45 of 1993.

¶6

The appellants, except compensation, do not challenge any other aspect. Hence, without delving into the detailed facts, skeletal facts necessary for the purposes of this Court are that the deceased was 28 years of age at the time of accident and his income has been considered to be Rs.1,200/- and 1/3rd has been deducted which is under challenge. However, while going through the record I do not find any reason to alter the same as it was devoid of factual data before the Tribunal proving his income to be more.

¶7

The multiplier awarded by the Tribunal is 12 and nothing under the head of future income has been awarded in view of the latest decision of the apex court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 0 Supreme (SC) 1050.

¶8

The deceased was serving but nothing has been proved as to what was his income and, therefore, the Tribunal has also disbelieved his income to be Rs.2,000/-. No evidence has been laid in that regard also. No evidence was adduced substantiating the oral evidence about his income. He was a person who was serving despite that no documentary evidence to show his income was there and therefore the Tribunal has considered his income to be Rs.1,200/- out of which certain portion has been deducted.

¶9

As for as the award of multiplier is concerned, it would be 17 as the deceased was in the bracket of

¶10

26-30 years in view of the decision of Pranay Sethi (Supra) . Hence, I award the multiplier of 17. Hence, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.800 x 12 x 5 = 48,000/-

¶11

This being a case of the year 1992, an additional sum of 40% will have to be added which would come to Rs.300 x 12 x 17 = 61,200/- would be the income admissible to the family under the head of future income as per the decision of Pranay Sethi (Supra).

¶12

In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The judgement and decree passed by the Tribunal shall be modified to the aforesaid extent.

¶13

Hence, the claimants would be entitled to the total additional sum of Rs.48,000 + 61,200 = 1,09,200/-. The additional amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% from the date of the filing of the claim petition till award and 6% thereafter. The additional amount alongwith interest be deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.1.2018 DKS

Meena Devi and Others v. Smt. Ramwati and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meena Devi and Others v. Smt. Ramwati and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Prabha Devi and Others Vs Anil Kumar and Another

National Insurance Com.Ltd. Deoria Vs Bachhi Devi and Others

Ganga Prasad Vs the General Manager Kanpur Electricity Supply

Bhawana @ Gudia and Another Vs Sri Hari Om

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kishan and 4 Ors.

Hari Om and Others Vs Hari Narain and Others