Partly allowed

Shanti Devi v. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2019FAFO/1322/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal sought enhancement of compensation for a minor child's death. The court enhanced the award to Rs.2,25,000 relying on Manju Devi and Mumtaz Ahmad, distinguishing Kishan Gopal. The interest rate was also enhanced to 7.5% per National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is partly allowed; the award enhanced to Rs.2,25,000/- with 7.5% interest from the date of filing.

Shanti Devi Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Others — Insurance | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No.1322 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Shanti Devi Respondent :- The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Singh,Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Irshad Ahmad

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned for the respondent and perused the judgment and order impugned.

¶6

By means of this appeal, the appellant - claimant has challenged the order dated 22.1.2019 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bareilly in M.A.C.P. No.1054 of 2016, awarding a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with 7% interest.

¶7

This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the death of a minor child of 15 years. The appellants are the parents and family member of the minor child who died in the accident because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck bearing No.UK04-CA-0908. The accident having occurred is not in dispute. The respondent herein has not filed any appeal or cross-objection meaning thereby they have accepted the findings of the Tribunal.

¶8

The Apex Court in UPSRTC Vs. Km. Mamta and others, reported in AIR 2016 SC 948 , has held that all the issues raised in the memo of appeal required to be addressed and decided by the first appellate court.

¶9

Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has fallen in error in not granting Rs.1,50,000/-, which is minimum, by calculating notional income at Rs.15,000/- per annum. He has further submitted that the amount should be not less than

¶10

¶11

Rs.1,50,000/- and has submitted that minimum amount would be Rs.1,50,000/-.

¶12

The learned counsel for the appellant has further contended that the award is bad and he has further relied on decision of the Apex Court in Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others, 2013 (101) ALR 281 (SC), and Manju Devi's case, reported in 2005 (1) TAC 609 , as relied by this Court in its recent decision in United India Insurance Company Limited. Vs. Mumtaz Ahmad and Another, 2017 (2) AICC 1229 wherein this Court held as follows:

¶13

"6.Sri Ram Singh has heavily relied on the decision in th case of Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others, 2013 (101) ALR 281 (SC) = 2013 (131) AIC 219 = 2014 (1) AICC 208 (SC) and Manju Devi's case, 2005 (1) TAC 609 = 2005 AICC 208 (SC). It goes without saying the notional figure fixed by the Apex Court since Manju Devi's judgment has been consistently Rs.2,25,000 for children below the age of 15 years. I think that is just and proper and hence, the amount requires to be enhanced from Rs.1,57,000 to Rs.2,25,000 with 6% be recovered from the owner. The appeal is partly allowed. The cross-objection is also partly allowed."

¶14

Learned counsel for the respondent could not point out that the enhancement called for is objectionable.

¶15

The judgment of Kisan Gopal (Supra) cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case as in Kishan Gopal's case the apex court did not deduct any amount towards personal expenses. The judgment of Mumtaz Ahmad (Supra) is applicable to the facts of this case, hence, the award is required to be enhanced and is enhanced to Rs.2,25,000/-. I am even fortified in my view by the decisions of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Anwar Ali and another, 2003 (3) TAC 12 (All.); Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Surendra Kumar and others, 2007 ACJ 1466; New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Allahabad Vs. Raj Bahadur and another, 2002 (3) TAC 409 (All.).

¶16

¶17

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 :

¶18

" 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. "

¶19

The normal rate of interest after the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal and Others (Supra) would be 7.5%, hence, the amount of Rs.2,25,000/- with 7.5% rate of interest from the date of filing of claim petition till the amount is deposited.

¶20

The appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and decree shall stand modified. The additional amount be recalculated with fresh rate of interest and deposited within 12 weeks from today.

¶21

This Court is thankful to both the counsels appearing for the parties for getting this old matter disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 13.9.2019 Irshad

Shanti Devi v. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Devi v. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishwanath Vs Smt. Kamla Devi

Bhupendra Kumar Singh Vs Smt. Kamal Kumari and Others

Ashok Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.and Others

Kallu Prasad and Another Vs Raj Kumar Sahu and Others

U.P.S.E.Board Vs M/S Sai Steel Industries

National Insurance Co. Vs Smt. Puspa Devi and Others