Partly allowed

Sumitra and Others v. the New India Insurance Comp. Ltd.andORS

Chhattisgarh HC28 Apr 2010MA/473/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This division bench allowed an appeal filed by the widow and minor children of a deceased victim to enhance motor accident compensation. The court increased the award from Rs. 2,28,000 to Rs. 3,15,000 based on a reassessed income of Rs. 2,500 per month and a multiplier of 15.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarded to appellants/claimants from Rs.2,28,000 to Rs.3,15,000 plus quantified interest of Rs.8,000.

Sumitra and Others Vs the New India Insurance… — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2010)

¶1

HiGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

DIVISION BENCH

\ }\ .S

HO HO	N'BLE N'BLE Misc.	SHRI RAJEEVGUPTA, CJ. SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appeal No. 473 of2003
Appellants	1.	Sumitra, widow of late Sukhnandan Singh, by caste Gond, aged about years.
	2.	Ku. Malti, D/o. Late Shri Sukhnandan Singh, caste Gond,aged about 3 years (minor) through : naturat guardian i.e. appe!lant No.1 (mother);
	3. 4. 5.	Ekkawan Singh, son of late Shri Sukhnandan Singh, caste Gond, aged about 2 years (minor) through : natural guardian i.e. appellant No.1 (mother) Thakur Singh, son of Shri Lakhu Singh, caste Gond, aged about 59 years. Indraso, wifeofShri Thakursingh, caste: Gond, aged about 55 years. All are resident of village Sambalpur, Police Station Jainagar, distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh) Versus
Resoondents	1	The New India Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Station Road, Robertsganj, Distt. Sonbhadra, (Uttar Pradesh)
		(Insurer of the vehicle No. U.P. 65 H
		i :i Smt. Prabhukha Devi, (Smt. Pramuktia Devi) wife of Shri Rambali MishraJ Chopan Road, Dala, P.0. Dala, diSttl Sonbhadra (Uttar Pradcsh)

lj;

<:j1

Durga Prasad Gond, son of Shri Jai Prasad Gond, aged about 30 years, resident of viltage - Salkhan, P.S. Chopan, distt. Sonbhadra (Uttar Pradesh). (Driver^{ofthevehicleNo.U.P.65H} 5002)

¶10

Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act

¶11

Present:	Shri Sushii Dubey, learned counsel appellants.	for	the
	Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, learned Senior with Shri Anand Gupta, learned cou respondent No.1. l	Cou nsel	nsel for
	Noneforrespondents No.2&3thbugh seroe	d,

¶12

ORDER

¶13

(28th April, 2010)

¶14

The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

¶15

The appellants are seeking enhancement of ^the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident 'the Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, District Surguja (for short, Tribunal') vide award dated 07.03.2003, passed in Claim Ciase No.92/2002.

¶16

The appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow, (njnor children and parents of deceased Sukhnandan Singh, claiijned 1 compensation of Rs.46,84,000/- by fiiing a claim petition Utjider Section 166 of the Motor Vehictes Act, for his death in the niJQtor accident on 22.07.2002.

¶17

. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entireevidenis leid before it held that deceased Sukhnandan Slngh died on ac|c^unt

¶18

MHU-<ni«U!«!>Tn

¶19

¶20

! ^pi^iuoou! S4} Suissssse ui psjjs seq leunqyi sqt 'teitt peuiLuqns 'AeqnQ |s}ue||sddB eqi jcy issunoo psujeai |iL)sns UMS (9 i i ['^usiuAed |enpep siep 94} ||i} uoniied LUIBIO syuo Buiiyp 3)ep aijlli.uo^ uinuue jed %^. @ -/OQO'9S'Z'sy jo uoiiesusduuoo ^o lupoijue^sAoqe94}uo issjsiui ^o tusiuAed pepejip^jsqyn.! |eunqui 9111 •tuspiooe JOIOLU BLJ} ui 46013 UBpueuy>|ns psseaosp p L|}B3P 9MI JO^ StUELUie|0 SI<1 0} uo]}BSU3dLuoo SB -/OOO'QZ'Z'sy 10 1 r uihs |e}0( e pspjeMB |eunqui su^ 'speaL) jsyio jspun -/OOO'SI-'sy '-/QOO'Ql.'Z'sy .tOfiuns jsqyn^ BUIPJBAAB Ag ot (no p9>|jo SGAA uoflesusdtuoo 941 'QI, p J9i|djt|niu ai^ LJ}!AA -/ooo'ZI-'sy .(o Aouepusdsp |enuue 8L|} 6u!A|du|niu Ag 'uinuuB jed -/OOO'ZL'sy 'sesusdxs }e psssssse SEM Aouepusdsp .siueLuieio SL|} ieaosjsd si4 spje/AO} psseeosp 34} jo SLUooui 34} ^o ^fi, Buipnpsp Ag 'Lunuue Jsd -/ooO'Bl.'sy pue qiuoai jsd -/OOS' I'sy }B peseaoep 341 p aujooui sy} psssesse leunqui syi (9 •Atjieuy psuieue 3AEi| 'MOU leunquii SIQ Aq pepjoo&i sfiuipuy SAoqe aqi 'PJBMB 94} isure6e |e9dde Aue p3|it }ou eAey siuspuodssj sqi sv (^ •stUBLUieio 941 o} uojiesusdujpo Aed ot eiqeiisBM AuedLUOo eouBjnsui SL)} 'peiiiun Aueduuoo souejnsu] eipu| M9N 94) 4im pejnsui SBM tuspiooe ay} p 3}Bp SIQ uo >|omi s|0!4SA Buipusyo 94} se 'ZQOQ/H 99 dn'ON uoiiejtsiDBj Suyesq >|omi eioiqsA Buipusyo eq} p jsAup 34} ^o BuiAup }ua6i|6su pue L|sej o} enp pajjnooo luspiooe 941 'ZOOZ'ZO'ZZ uo }U9piooe JOIOLU aq} ui LUiq Aq psuieisns ssunfu! syi p

¶21

the deceased at Rs.18,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,28,000/- only.

¶22

Shri Shreekumar Agrawa!, learned Senior counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.1 the New India Insurance Company Limited, onthe other hand supported the award and contended that, the compensation of Rs.2,28,000/awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶23

True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Sukhnandan Singh used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as driver, theevidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. The emplpyer of the deceased was not examined before the Tribunal to establish the income of the deceased to the extent of Rs.6,000/- per month.

¶24

Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunat at Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum in the year 2002 is certainly on the lower side.

¶25

In our considered opinion, deceased Sukhnandan Singh being aged about 26 years could have easily eamed Rs.80-85/per day even by working as an un-skiiled labour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the incomie of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- per month and Rs.30,000/-

¶26

annum.

¶27

.,.-.,1..1. niiBinttaiat"" "^~*ui

¶28

By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.30,000/- towards the personal expenses ofthe deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.20,000/- per annum.

¶29

Considering the age of the deceased, his widow, children and parents, we are of the opinion, that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case.

¶30

By multiplying the annualdependency of Rs.20,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.3,00,000/-. The ciaimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive total sumof Rs.3,15,000/- as compensation for the dsath of deceased Sukhnandan Singh in the motor accident. 14) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interesf on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.

¶31

Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that Insurance Company alone is npt to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on ithe enhanced amount of comoensation of Rs.87.000/- at Rs.8,000/-.

¶32

.il.-;S,.

¶33

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,28,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,15,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.8,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.87,000/-.

¶34

Respondent No.1 The New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.95,000/towards enhanced amount of; (Rs.87,000/compensation + Rs.8,000/- towards quantified amount of interesti on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.87,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal.

¶35

No order as to costs. Sd/R.N. Chandrakar sd/re Chief Jusdce

¶36

subbu

Sumitra and Others v. the New India Insurance Comp. Ltd.andORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumitra and Others v. the New India Insurance Comp. Ltd.andORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Basant Bai and Another Vs Thakur Ram Sahu and Others

Saraswati Bai Verma Vs Murli Manohar and Others

Ishwari Sahu and Other Vs Sharad Kumar Verma and Others

Thakur Ram Vs JaiKishore And Others

Smt.Daruna Devi Sahu and Others Vs Kailash Chandra Joshi and Others

Narayan Lal Sahu Vs Ramlal Sahu and Others