Allowed

Smt.Santosh Devi and Others v. Om Kumar Singhal and Others

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2021FAFO/1975/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal order. The court enhanced pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensation, recalculated dependency on total income including future prospects, and directed the insurance company to pay and recover from the owner.

What did the court decide?

Award modified to Rs. 19,26,250/- with 6% interest; Insurance company directed to pay directly and recover from vehicle owner.

Smt.Santosh Devi and Others Vs Om Kumar Singhal and… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1975 of 2008

¶3

Appellant :- Smt.Santosh Devi And Others Respondent :- Om Kumar Singhal And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari,Siddhartha Srivastava,Syed Ali Murtaza,Vineet Kumar Sahu

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant no.3 and Sri Syed Ali Murtaza, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

¶6

Claimants have filed this appeal being aggrieved of award dated 27.03.2008 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Fatehpur in the Claim Case No.90 of 2004 on five grounds namely, future prospects @ 30% will be payable in the light of the law laid down in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and others; (2017) 16 SCC 680 taking into consideration age of the deceased to be 36 years at the time of the accident and taking into consideration his occupation as an agent of Life Insurance Corporation of India. It is also submitted that there are as many as five dependents i.e. wife and four children, therefore, in place of 1/3 deduction made by learned Claims Tribunal, ¼ deduction will be admissible in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Smt. Sarla Verma others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others; 2009 (6) SCC 121 . It is also submitted that under the head of nonpecuniary damages only a sum of Rs.7,500/- (seven thousand and five hundred) has been awarded which should have been in fact Rs.70,000/-(seventy thousand) in the light of the law laid down in case of Pranay Sethi (supra). It is fairly submitted that Tribunal has applied multiplier of 16 which will be 15 looking

¶7

to the age of the deceased and the ratio of the law in case of Sarla Verma (supra). It is further submitted that though Insurance Company has been exonerated on the ground of a finding that driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid and effective driving licence, but in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in case of Pappu and others Vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and another; 2018 (1) TAC 360 (SC) , principle of pay and recover will be applicable because Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that offending vehicle was insured at the relevant point of time with the New India Assurance Company Ltd and the motorcycle on which deceased was travelling was insured with Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

¶8

Learned Tribunal has accepted income of the deceased to be Rs.1,32,000/-(one lakh and thirty two thousand) per annum which is not disputed by the counsel for the opposite party.

¶9

It is evident that there are five dependants on the deceasedShiv Ram Singh namely, his wife and four children, therefore, in the light of the law laid down in case of Smt. Sarla Verma others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others; 2009 (6) SCC 121 , therefore, 1/4^th deduction is to be made towards personal expenses and living expenses taking annual dependency to Rs.99,000/-(ninety nine thousand). Tribunal has accepted age of the deceased to be 40 years, therefore, in the light of the law laid down in case of National Insurance Company (supra), there will be an addition of 25% to the established income, as deceased was working as an agent in Life Insurance Corporation, which cannot be said to be a permanent job and, therefore, shall fall within the category of self employed, taking total dependency to Rs.1,23,750/-(one lakh twenty three thousand and seven hundred fifty). Multiplier of 15 will be applicable taking total pecuniary compensation to

¶10

Rs.18,56,250/-(eighteen lakhs fifty six thousand and two hundred fifty). Over and above this, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/-(seventy thousand) under the head of nonpecuniary compensation taking total compensation to Rs.19,26,250/-(nineteen lakhs twenty six thousand and two hundred fifty) which claimants are entitled to claim.

¶11

This amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition.

¶12

It is further directed that impugned award is further modified to the extent that instead of exonerating the Insurance Company in toto, in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in case of Pappuu and others Vs. Vinod Lamba and another; (2018) 3 SCC 208, Insurance Company will pay the amount of compensation in favour of the claimants and shall be entitled to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle namely Truck No.HR-38 C-4566.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.1.2021 Ashutosh

Smt.Santosh Devi and Others v. Om Kumar Singhal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Santosh Devi and Others v. Om Kumar Singhal 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

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Rajmuni and Another

Smt. Rajmuni Singh Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another

Vijay Kumar and 4 Others Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Others

Smt. Mamta and 4 Others Vs Ramesh Singh and Another

Hari Dutt Vs State of U.P. Thru Collector and Another

U.P. Avas Evam Viks Parishad Vs Omveer Singh Chaudhary and Others