Allowed

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Dy. Manager v. Smt. Gyanmati and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2021FAFO/3320/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First appeal filed by the insurance company against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The Court modified the compensation amount by correcting the deduction for living expenses and adjusting non-pecuniary compensation, holding the deceased's mother was not a widow. Appeal allowed; original award reduced.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed. Award of compensation reduced to Rs. 8,53,284. Cross-objections disposed off with appeal.

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Dy. Manager Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 3320 of 2017

¶3

Appellant :- Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Dy. Manager Respondent :- Smt. Gyanmati And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Amit Kumar Singh,Ram Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ram Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

There is delay of 7 days in filing the cross-objection/cross appeal. Delay in filing the cross-objection/cross appeal is condoned on the oral prayer of the respondent-claimants.

¶7

This appeal has been filed by the insurance company being aggrieved of the award dated 26.07.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 14, Allahabad in Claim Case No. 311 of 2012.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that they are aggrieved of the fact that though mother of the deceased is survived by her husband and therefore, minor sisters and brother of the deceased cannot be said to be dependent on the deceased, but claimants in a very tactful and mischievous manner represented the mother of the deceased to be a widow and therefore, her minor children to be dependent on the deceased, who was a bachelor and obtained 1/3rd deduction from the tribunal whereas admittedly claimant no. 1 is not a widow and therefore, 50% deduction should have been made towards the living expenses of the deceased Anil Kumar.

¶9

Sri Ram Singh submits that income of the deceased has been accepted at Rs. 5,000/- (five thousand rupees), which is on the lower side and therefore, award needs to be modified accordingly. It is also submitted that under the head of nonpecuniary compensation, only a sum of Rs. 17,500/- (seventeen thousand five hundred rupees) has been awarded, which needs to be enhanced to Rs. 30,000/- (thirty thousand rupees).

¶10

It is true that deceased was a bachelor. His mother is not a widow, therefore, it cannot be said that minor sisters and brother of the deceased are dependent on the deceased. Therefore, 50% deduction is to be made from the minimum wages, prescribed for a skilled labourer on the date of the

¶11

accident. As prescribed minimum wages for a skilled labourer on the date of the accident i.e., 09.03.2012 is to the tune of Rs. 5,445/- (five thousand four hundred forty five rupees), when 50% is deducted towards living expenses, then it come out to Rs. 2,722.50 (two thousand seven hundred twenty two rupees and fifty paise) per month or Rs. 32,670/- (thirty two thousand six hundred seventy rupees) per annum. When 40% is added towards future prospects and not 50%, as has been prescribed under the U.P. Motor Vehicles (Eleventh Amendment) Rules, 2011, then annual dependency will come out to Rs. 45,738/(forty five thousand seven hundred thirty eight rupees) per annum.

¶12

Age of the deceased was 20 years, therefore, multiplier of 18 will be applicable, taking pecuniary compensation to Rs. 8,23,284/- (eight lakhs twenty three thousand two hundred eighty four rupees). Over and above which, claimants are entitled to Rs. 30,000/- (thirty thousand rupees) under the head of non-pecuniary compensation, taking total compensation to Rs. 8,53,284/- (eight lakhs fifty three thousand two hundred eighty four rupees) against a sum of Rs. 10,97,500/- (ten lakhs ninety seven thousand five hundred rupees) awarded by learned tribunal. Therefore, there will be a reduction in the awarded amount to the tune of Rs. 2,44,216/- (two lakhs forty four thousand two hundred sixteen rupees). To this extent, award stands modified. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact.

¶13

In above terms, appeal and the cross-objections/cross appeal are disposed off.

¶14

Order Date :- 4.2.2021 Vikram/-

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Dy. Manager v. Smt. Gyanmati and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Dy. Manager v. Smt. Gyanmati and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Kamlawati Devi and 5 Others

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sri Shiv Ram and Another

Sarla @ Rani Vs Sahiram Yadav and 2 Others

sushila devi Vs united india insurance Co. Ltd. hrough manager and another

Smt. Lala Devi and Others Vs U P.S.R.T.C. and Others

Smt. Bhanu and 3 Others Vs Vishnu and 2 Others