Allowed

Smt. Kamlesh Katiyar v. Vijay Kumar and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Feb 2020FAFO/2596/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's method of computing income by averaging three years but enhanced the non-pecuniary damages citation and case direction to 70000 rupees as per precedent. The total claim was enhanced with 7% interest.

What did the court decide?

The claim was enhanced from Rs. 19,51,854 to Rs. 19,91,854. Claimants are entitled to 7% interest of Rs. 40,000 from the date of filing.

Smt. Kamlesh Katiyar Vs Vijay Kumar and 2 Others — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2596 of 2017

¶3

Appellant :- Smt. Kamlesh Katiyar Respondent :- Vijay Kumar And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Vidya Kant Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Syed Ali Murtaza

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri V.K. Shukla, counsel for the appellants/claimants and Sri Syed Ali Murtaza, counsel for the respondents.

¶6

This appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants against the judgment and award dated 16.05.2017 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court no.6, Kanpur Nagar in M.A.C.P. No.340 of 2012 on two grounds namely; learned Claims Tribunal has taken average of three income tax returns for the assessment year 2010-11 to 2012-13 whereas, the Tribunal should have taken income tax return for the assessment year 2011-12 into consideration for computing the income of the deceased. Secondly, it is submitted that Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.30,000/- (thirty thousand) under the head of non-pecuniary damages whereas, a sum of Rs.70,000/-(seventy thousand) should have been awarded.

¶7

Sri Syed Ali Murtaza, counsel for the respondents submits that learned Claims Tribunal has not committed any irregularity in taking average of three years income of the deceased, inasmuch as, that gives fair assessment of income of the deceased.

¶8

Fact of the matter is that third return average of which has been taken by learned Claims Tribunal for the assessment year 201213 was filed on 31st July, 2012 whereas, date of accident is 04.03.2012. It is also an admitted fact that return showing net income of Rs.2,12,498/-(two lakhs twelve thousand four hundred and ninety eight) was filed for the assessment year

¶9

2011-12 on 29th July, 2011 much before the accident, but taking into consideration nature of fluctuation in the returns brought on record, it cannot be said that the Tribunal erred in taking an average instead of relying on the returned income of the deceased for a particular year.

¶10

Therefore, there appears to be no substance in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants/claimants that last returned income should have been taken into consideration for the purpose of computation of just compensation.

¶11

This Court does not find any illegality/irregularity in the order passed by the Tribunal as far as computation of income is concerned but claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/(seventy thousand) under the non-pecuniary head as per the law laid down in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and others as reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, but instead Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.30,000/-

¶12

Accordingly, claim is enhanced to Rs.19,91,854/- (nineteen lakhs ninety one thousand eight hundred and fifty four) in place of 19,51,854/- (nineteen lakhs fifty one thousand eight hundred and fifty four).

¶13

The claimants will be entitled to 7% interest on the enhanced amount i.e. Rs.40,000/- from the date of filing of the claim petition.

¶14

In above terms, appeal is disposed off.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.2.2020 Ashutosh

Smt. Kamlesh Katiyar v. Vijay Kumar and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kamlesh Katiyar v. Vijay Kumar 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

Smt. Kum Kum Devi and Another Vs Narendra and 2 Ors.

Smt. Laxmi Devi and 4 Others Vs Pankaj Chabra and 2 Others

Ashutosh Agnihotri and 3 Others Vs Shyam Lal and 3 Others

State of U.P. Vs Devi Ram 7 Others

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Pili Kothi Banda Vs Smt. Vimla Devi and 4 Others

Sudhakar Jha Vs Sudhir Kumar Jha