The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kamla and 4 Others

Court No. - 5

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 171 of 2020

Appellant :- The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Kamla And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- Hanuman Prasad Dube,Hare Krishna Tripathi,Vipul Dube

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

The present appeal has been filed against the award dated 17.10.2019 passed by MACT/Special Judge(DAA), Jhansi in MACP No.431 of 2018 whereby the the tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.43,08,118/- alongwith 7% interest from the date of institution of claim petition for the death of one Ghanaram in an accident on 30.07.2017 with Car No.UP78EF/8301.

¶7

Challenging the aforesaid award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the deceased was travelling on Ape No.UP93AT/9226 which was hit by offending car no. UP78EF/8301 from behind. It is further contended that the finding of the tribunal that the accident had taken place due to negligence of driver of offending car is illegal and not sustainable. It is further contended that the deceased had left only three months of service from retirement and the tribunal has applied multiplier of 9 which is not correct inasmuch as the claimants are entitled to just compensation and accordingly, it is submitted that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is excessive.

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has contended that the finding of the tribunal that the accident had occurred due to sole negligence of driver of car is based upon proper

¶9

appreciation of facts and evidence on record. It is further contended that it is established on record that the car had hit the Ape from behind and because of impact of car the deceased fell from Ape and hence, it is submitted that the finding of the tribunal in respect of negligence of driver of car is a finding of fact and does not call for any interference by this Court. It is further contended that the tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 9 for computing the compensation in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others 2009 (6) SCC 121 .

¶10

Thus, it is contended that the appeal lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed.

¶11

It has been established on the basis of record that the car had hit the Ape from behind and impact upon car was such that the deceased fell from Ape due to which he suffered injuries and later on died. The accident had been proved by PW-2 Vivek Kushwaha and no evidence in rebuttal was produced by the insurance company. In such view of fact, the finding of the tribunal on the issue of negligence is a finding of fact and is not required interference by this Court. So far as quantification of compensation is concerned, the tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 9 in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma (supra) considering the age of the deceased. Thus, this Court finds that the tribunal has not committed any illegality in computing the compensation by applying the multiplier of 9.

¶12

For the reasons given above, the appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed .

¶13

Order Date :- 23.9.2022 SS

¶14

Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2022.10.13 11:15:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Kamla and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Kamla and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fateh Mohammad @ Chhanga Vs Pawan Kumar Rana and 3 Others

Shiv Karan Singh and Another Vs Yogeshwer Singh and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Tikori Ram Verma and 2 Others Vs Ajay Kumar Singh and 3 Others

The Board of Revenue Vs Sri Saifuddin and Others

M/S Prem Heavy Engineering and Another Vs Shikhar Chand Jain and Others

Veeresh Kumar and Another Vs U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and Another