Partly allowed

Leelavati Yadav and Others v. Rajendra Kumar Vaishnav and Others

Chhattisgarh HC5 Apr 2010MAC/1284/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal by the claimants against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.2,92,000. The court enhanced the compensation to Rs.3,51,000 primarily by changing the multiplier from 12 to 14 based on the deceased's age, along with additional specific sums for funeral, loss of estate, and loss of consortium.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation to Rs.3,51,000; Rs.6,000 interest; directed Insurance Co to deposit Rs.65,000 within three months.

Leelavati Yadav and Others Vs Rajendra Kumar Vaishnav and… — Insurance | Chhattisgarh HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

^' ^-^^c

¶3

HtGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

DIVISION BENCH

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR.J

¶6

M.A.(CiNo. 1284 Of 2007

¶7

Appellants 1. Smt Leelavati Yadav, W/o Late Chhannu Claimants Ram Yadav, aged about 39 years, Occupation^-HouseWife

¶8

Parmeshwar Yadav, S/o Late Chhannu Ram Yadav, aged about 14 years

¶9

Bhuneshwar Yadav, S/o Late Chhannu Ram Yadav, aged about 07 years

¶10

Kamlesh Yadav, S/o Late Chhannu Ram Yadav, aged about 04 years

¶11

(Appellant^{No.2,3&4beingminoron} behatf of through their tegal guardian mother appellant No.1 Smt Leelavati Yadav)

¶12

Smt Chamarin Yadav, W/o Late Shri Chand Yadav, aged about years, Occupation^- nothing

¶13

Alt R/o Village^- Saradih, Police Station^- Mahasamund, Tehsil and District Mahasamund (CG)

¶14

Versus

¶15

Resoondents 1. Rajendra Kumar Vaishnav, S/o Vishram Non-claimants Das Vaishnav,aged about 35 years, occupation^- Driver, R/o Village^- Patwar, Police Station^- Lahira, Tehsil S Distrtot^- Kawardha (CG)

¶16

Present R/o^- Ward No^-3, Dalctapara, tewardha, Distrtot^- t^wardha (CG)

¶17

(Driver of vehicle Metactor bearing registration No.CG 09/B-0140)

¶18

^'-s^

¶19

.<:

¶20

2	Vikash Bafna S/o Mishrltal Baftia, R/o Ward No. - 13, Mahasrfr Swami Chowk, Kawardha, District-l^wardha(CG)
	(Owner of vehicle Metador bearing registration No.CG09/8-0140)
3	The New Indta Insurancs Company Limited through Divisional Manager, Divisionat Offlce, Kuthcery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, District-Raipur(CQ)
	(Insurer of vehicle Mdador beanng registration No.CG09/8-01W)

¶21

Appeal u/s173 of the Motor Vehictes Act. 1988

¶22

Present : Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel forthe appellants. None for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel foF respondent No.3.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(SulApril,2010)

¶25

The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by

¶26

NS—U^

¶27

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

¶28

This is claimants' appeat for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Ctaims Tribunal, Mahasamund, short the Tribunal') vide awand dated (for C8.08.2007, passed in Claim Case No.4/2007.

¶29

As against the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- daimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow, minor cNldren and mother ofdeceased Chhannu Ram Yadav, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles AcA, for his death !n the motor accident on 16.10.2006, the Tribunal awarded a totat sum of

¶30

3f'9k^ 't^^^?-~..,s?i'rf°"*SS'^!.^ ^^' K 1 j v^^^/ sssi«saisf'St;-,.—".3'

¶31

Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date oS actual payment.

¶32

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evldence IKI before it held that deceased Chhannu Ram Yadav dled on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor acctdent on 16.10.2(X ; the accident occurred due to rash and negli^nt driving of the driver of the offending vehicte Metador bearing reglstration No.CG 09 B/0140; as the offending vehiole Metador on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

¶33

As the respondents have not flled any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finallty.

¶34

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month. By deductirg 1/3nt of Rs.3,000/- towards the personal ®<pensesof the deceased, the claimants' dependency wasassessed at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multlplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multlptier of 12, the compenaition was workKl out to Rs.2,88,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- for loss ofconsortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs2,32,QWI- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Chhannu Ram Yadav in the motor accidert. The Tribunal further dirscted

¶35

'%*' •T 7 / ' TTKC^SC

¶36

—L

¶37

payment of interest on the above amount of compansation of Rs.2,92,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the dateofactusd payment.

¶38

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, teamed counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased; in selecting the lower multiptier of 12; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- only.

¶39

7} Shri Raj Awasthi, teamed counsel for respendent No.3 The New India Insurance Company Umited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensaUon of Rs.2,92,OX)/awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Chhannu Ram Yadav used to eam Rs.150/- per day as Mason, ttie evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature, In this slate of evidence, the Tribunat was left with no other option, but to assess the income of the deceased on Its own estimate at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month.

¶40

On due consideration, we do not flnd any inflnnity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month. 10) The claimants' dependency also has been r^hUy assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1/31'" of Rs.3,000/- towards personat expenses of the deceased.

¶41

B_.

¶42

:/»'
y:

¶43

The muttiplier of 12, selected by the Tribunal is certalnly on the lower side. Considering that decrased Chhannu Ram Yariav was aged about 43 years on the date of the accident and his widow Smt Leelavati Yadav was shown to be ^ years of age in the claim petition, in our considered opinion, multiplier of 14 would be appropriate in the present case in v\ew of the recent dicrtum of the Apex Court in the case of Saria Verma (Snrt) amt Others Vs DelW Transport Corporatron and Another reported tn (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, wherein mulUplier of 14 was prescribed for the age group between 41 -45 years.

¶44

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- vnth the multiplter of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.3,36,000/-. Ttie claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- Tor loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to recelve a totat sumof Rs.3,51 ,000/- as compaisation forthe death of deceased Chhannu Ram Yadav in the motor accident.

¶45

Leamed counsel for the parties submitted thatwith a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the perlod for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on theenhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantifl«Jin this appail itself.

¶46

Considering all the relevant factors inctuding the delay in disposal of the claim petitlon and the present appeal, and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be btamed for the ertlre

¶47

^ ^ ""i..
^^ 1
J? /
"<^4ss"ses''

¶48

delay in the matter, we quantity the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.59,000/- at Rs.6,000/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal flled by the appeltarrts/ claimants for enhancementof the compensaUon is altowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,51 ,(XX)/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.6,000/- on the enhanced amount of cempensatton of

¶49

Rs.59,000/-.

¶50

Respondent No.3 The New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' tlme for depositing tHe total sum of Rs.65,000/(Rs.59,0(X)/-towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.6,000/- towards quantified amoimt of interest on the enhanced amount of compensatiw of Rs.59,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal.

¶51

No order as to costs.

¶52

padma

¶53

Sd/Chief Justice

¶54

Sd/-
R-N. Chandrakar
Judge

Leelavati Yadav and Others v. Rajendra Kumar Vaishnav and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Leelavati Yadav and Others v. Rajendra Kumar Vaishnav 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

Trilochan Seth and Others Vs Ram Chandra Behra and Others

Sanjay Lahare Vs Sanjay Kumar and Others

Smt.Jyoti Sharma and Others Vs Kaushik Ram Naurenge and Others

Dhanmati and Ors. Vs Maheshram and Anr.

Nand Lal and Another Vs Dharampreet Singh and Another

Chintaram Dhimar and Another Vs Shahjad Khan and Others