Partly allowed

Kumari Iti Agarwal v. Sri Ganesh Pal and Others

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2019FAFO/1318/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the compensation quantum in a motor accident case. The court enhanced the award amount by calculating future loss of income for a minor student and modified the interest rate to 7.5% following Supreme Court jurisprudence.

What did the court decide?

The Tribunal's judgment and decree were modified to award Rs. 3,77,880/- with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Kumari Iti Agarwal Vs Sri Ganesh Pal and Others — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1318 of 2009

¶3

Appellant :- Kumari Iti Agarwal Respondent :- Sri Ganesh Pal And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Jai Narain,Pankaj Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- Arun Kumar Singh,Prem Sagar Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

¶5

1. Heard Sri Tarun Agarwal holding brief of Shri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the judgment and order impugned. None present for the owner.

¶6

2. This appeal, at the behest of the injured-claimant, challenges the judgment and order dated 09.01.2009 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Jhansi (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C. No. 440 of 2006 awarding a sum of Rs.2,52,000/- with interest at the rate of 7% for the injuries suffered by the claimant – appellant.

¶7

3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided in favour of the appellant herein. Respondent concerned has not challenged the liability imposed on it by the Tribunal. Hence, the only issue to be decided is, the quantum.

¶8

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has considered income of the injured-claimant to be Rs.15,000/- per year which is unjust and should be at least Rs.36,000/- per year. It is submitted that no amount under the head of future loss of income has been granted. It is also submitted that the amount under the non-pecuniary heads and the interest awarded are also on the lower side and requires to be enhanced in view of the following authoritative pronouncement.

¶9

(i) Sanjay Kumar Vs. Ashok Kumar and another, (2014) 5 SCC 330; (ii) Syed. Sadiq and others Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, (2014) 2 SCC 735; (iii) V. Mekala Vs. M. Malathi and another, (2014) 11 SCC 178; and

¶10

(iv) Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles (Eleventh Amendment) Rules, 2011.

¶11

5. As against this, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that there was no evidence that the appellant was earning Rs.36,000/- per month and the medical bills are also not

¶12

produced and, therefore, the claim from Rs.2,52,000/- to 11,00,000/- in pursuance of the injuries, future loss and suffering cause to the appellant due to the accident cannot be granted.

¶13

6. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the judgment and order impugned, this Court feels that the income of the deceased would be Rs.1500/- per month namely Rs.18,000/per year. To which as the injured was a minor and student of class IX at the time of accident, 40% of the income would have to be added as future loss of income to the injured in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 343 and Syed. Sadiq and others (Supra) which would bring the figure to Rs.18,000 + Rs.7,200 = 25,200/-. The annual loss of the injured would be 20% namely Rs.5,040/-. Multiplier of 18 has been rightly granted by the Tribunal. Hence, he would be entitled to Rs.20,160 (i.e. Rs.25,200 – Rs.5040) x 18 = Rs.3,62,880 + Rs.15,000 in addition to that is granted for pain, shock and sufferings, which is Rs. 3,77,880/-

¶14

7. As far as issue of rate of interest is concerned, the interest should be 7.5% in view of the latest decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal and Others, 2019 (2) T.A.C. 705 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court has held as under :

¶15

"13. The aforesaid features equally apply to the contentions urged on behalf of the claimants as regards the rate of interest. The Tribunal had awarded interest at the rate of 12% p.a. but the same had been too high a rate in comparison to what is ordinarily envisaged in these matters. The High Court, after making a substantial enhancement in the award amount, modified the interest component at a reasonable rate of 7.5% p.a. and we find no reason to allow the interest in this matter at any rate higher than that allowed by High Court."

¶16

8. No other grounds are urged orally when the matter was heard.

¶17

9. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the amount is deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.

¶18

10. Records and proceedings be sent back to Tribunal.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.09.2019

¶20

A.N. Mishra

Kumari Iti Agarwal v. Sri Ganesh Pal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Iti Agarwal v. Sri Ganesh Pal 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

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Chunna Devi and Others

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Sheela and Others

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt.Sheela and Others

Smt. Savitri Devi and Others Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Devendra Kumar Vs Wazid Ali and Another

Employees State Insurance Corp. Kanpur Vs Kamta Saran