Partly allowed

Smt Sheela Bai Yadav and Another v. Tekbir Singh and Others

Chhattisgarh HC1 Aug 2011MAC/1718/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a miscellaneous appeal enhancing compensation from Rs. 1,93,000 to Rs. 2,87,000 awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the death of Rajaram Yadav. The court adjusted income assessment and applied an appropriate multiplier.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,93,000 to Rs. 2,87,000; interest quantified at Rs. 11,000 on the enhanced amount.

Smt Sheela Bai Yadav and Another Vs Tekbir Singh and Others — Insurance | Chhattisgarh HC (2011)

¶1

^.'l^^-^^. y" ^^^•^l '^ II. ^ i ! '?. t®S^ ^v<^^ •'^..r'

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶3

DIVISION BENCH

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J.

¶5

Misc. Appeal (0 No. 1718 of 2008

¶6

Appellants	1.	Smt Sheela Bai Yadav, widow
		Rajaram Yadav, aged about 25 years
	2.	Purshottam Yadav, S/o Late Rajaram Yadav, aged about 03 months Through legal guardian mother Smt Sheela Bai Yadav appellant No.1, both are resident ofvillage Rasni, PS & Tahsil Arang District Raipur (CG) VERSUS
Respondents		Tekbir Singh @ Tejbir Singh, aged about 27 years, s/o Nand Singh, Occupation : Driver, R/o In front of Tatibandh Manglam Motor, BMR Transport Raipur, PS Amanaka, District Raipur (CG)
		The New India Insurance Company Limited, through : Divisional Manager (Division No.2) RDA Building, Bajrang Market, GE Road Raipur, District Raipur (CG)
		Smt Amrika Bai Yadv, w/o Late Pancham Ram Yadav, aged about 35 years
		Teejram Yadav, s/o late Pancham Ram Yadav, aged about 25 years
		Teejbatti Yadav, d/o late Pancham Ram Yadav Appellant No.3 to 5 all are resident of village Rasni PS and TahsilArang, District Raipur (CG)

¶7

Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1718 of 2008

¶8

..^-^^^
/ '^^%..
: CL,'11
"-.-.-^•'^'i'^j /^J

¶9

Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act.

¶10

Present: Shri CR Sahu and Shri CK Sahu, counsel for the appellants.

¶11

Shri Saurabh Sharma, counsel for respondent No.2.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

(01st August,2011)

¶14

The following order of the Court was passed by

¶15

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

¶16

This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, dated 25.06.2008, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award passed in Claim Case No.8/2008.

¶17

As against the compensation of Rs. 12,00,0007- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor son of deceased Rajaram Yadav, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 13.11.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,93,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

¶18

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Rajaram Yadav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13.11.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.CG04/J-5103; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was

¶19

Misc. Appeal (C) No.1718 of 2008

¶20

.^:.

¶21

insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

¶22

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

¶23

The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 10,0007with the multiplier of 18, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,80,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.13,000/- under otherheads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,93,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Rajaram Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,93,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

¶24

Shri CR Sahu and Shri CK Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,93,000/- only.

¶25

Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1718 of 2008

¶26

Shri Saurabh Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the New India Insurance Company LEmited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,93,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.-

¶27

True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Rajaram Yadav used to earn Rs.200/- per day as Mason, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing theabove occupation of the deceased and his income to the extent of Rs.6,000/- per month. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased.

¶28

Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2007 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration.

¶29

Considering that deceased Rajaram Yadav was aged about 30 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2007. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 11) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs. 16,0007- per annum. 12) Considering that deceased Rajaram Yadav was aged about

¶30

°7

¶31

Misc.Appeal (C) No. 1718 of 2008

¶32

30 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 17 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Vern^ia (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 17 has been prescribed for the age group between 26-30 years.

¶33

By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/with the multiplier of 17, the compensation works out to Rs.2,72,000/-. By awarding further sum of 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 become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,87,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Rajaram Yadav in the motor accident.

¶34

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself.

¶35

Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.94,000/at Rs.11,000/-.

¶36

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/

¶37

11-

¶38

Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1718 of 2008

¶39

claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,93,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,87,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.11,000/on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.94,000/-.

¶40

Respondent No.2 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,05,0007(Rs.94,000/towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.11,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount ofcompensation of Rs.94,000/-) before the

¶41

concerning Claims Tribunal.

¶42

No order as to costs.

¶43

Sd/Chief Justice

¶44

Sd/N. K. Agarwal Judge

¶45

padma

Smt Sheela Bai Yadav and Another v. Tekbir Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sheela Bai Yadav and Another v. Tekbir Singh 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

Smt Chandrika and Others Vs Ganeshwar Kumar Chandrakar and Ors.

Smt. Vinodini Patro and Others Vs Jivan Kumar Dey and Another

Sujit Bose Vs Domesh Kumar @ Ghumeshwar Sahu and Ors.

Kanhaiya Patel and Others Vs Chandram and Others

Smt.Sukhmati Vs Idrish Ali and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs Md. Idrish Ali and Others