Partly allowed

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

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2021FAFO/3200/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court enhanced non-pecuniary damages in a motor accident claim by Rs. 50,000 based on National Insurance Co. vs. Pranay Sethi guidelines. The Court rejected challenges regarding depreciation of income from higher education and statutory interest rates, finding no infirmity in the tribunal's award.

What did the court decide?

The award amount is enhanced to Rs. 7,63,000/- by adding Rs. 50,000/- to the single parent/non-pecuniary compensation component.

Vijay Kumar and 4 Others Vs National Insurance Co… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 3200 of 2016

¶3

Appellant :- Vijay Kumar And 4 Others Respondent :- National Insurance Co. Ltd. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Mohan Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

This appeal has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved of the award dated 27.8.2016 passed in MAC No.191 of 2014 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.12, Bulandshahr.

¶6

Notices were issued to the respondents by registered post on 16.11.2016 but as per office report these notices sent by registered A/D have nighter been received undelivered nor acknowledgment has been received after service and also nobody has put in appearance. Thus in terms of the provisions contained in Chapter VIII Rule 12 of Allahabad High Court Rules service is deemed sufficient. Respondents are proceeded ex-parte.

¶7

The appellant has filed this appeal challenging the quantum on the following three grounds viz., the learned claims tribunal has only taken into consideration income of the deceased at Rs.3,500/- which she was drawing as honorarium for her service as Shiksha Mitra in primary school, Bhatola; secondly, as she had passed BTC training, therefore, she had good prospects of being appointed on higher post; thirdly under the nonpecuniary head only a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been awarded whereas in the light of the law laid

¶8

down in case of National Insurance Company vs. Pranay Sethi and other (2017) 16 SCC 680 this amount should have been Rs.70,000/-. Another ground which is taken is that the deceased was rendering private tuitions but her income towards private tuition has not been taken into consideration in absence of any documentary evidence. It is also submitted that interest @7% is on the lower side and it should have been at least @7.5% as has been recently awarded by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶9

After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and going through the record, it is apparent that Tribunal has already awarded 50% of the honorarium drawn by deceased towards future prospects, therefore, the appellant submission that on account of her attaining higher education she would have earned higher remuneration is not a good ground to interfere in the award inasmuch as higher qualification is no passport to higher earning. As far as plea of addition of income from tuition is concerned that has been rightly discarded by Tribunal for want of documentary and independent corroborative evidence.

¶10

As far as rate of interest is concerned, it is already provided in U.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1988 (11^th Amendment), 2011 and that rate of interest has been awarded by learned claimants tribunal, therefore, once statutory rate of interest has been provided then no infirmity can be attached to the rate of interest awarded by learned claims

¶11

tribunal.

¶12

However, there is substance in argument advanced by appellant that under the nonpecuniary head only a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been awarded whereas it should have been Rs.70,000/-. This argument is accepted. Claim amount is enhanced to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and in place of Rs.7,13,000/- awarded by learned claims tribunal now a sum of Rs.7,63,000/- will be payable to the claimants. Other terms and conditions of award shall remain intact.

¶13

The appeal is disposed of.

¶14

Let the lower court record of the Tribunal be send back forthwith.

¶15

Order Date :- 8.1.2021 VS

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar and 4 Others v. National Insurance 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nanak Chander and 3 Others Vs Onkar

Smt. Shahnaz Parveen and Others Vs Shree Rama Roadways and Others

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Babli and 5 Ors.

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

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

Narsingh Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others