Partly allowed

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Thandaram Kurre and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC1 Apr 2013MAC/260/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed an insurance company's appeal against an award in a Motor Accident Claim. The court held that the Tribunal erred in deducting 1/3 personal expenses for the deceased and directed deduction of 50% as per Sarla Verma. Compensation was reduced from Rs. 3,85,000/- to Rs. 3,00,000/-.

What did the court decide?

The award amount is modified from Rs. 3,85,000/- to Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation, with interest at 6% p.a. The insurance company is granted one month to deposit the amount.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Thandaram… — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

¶1

TN THE HON’RIF HTGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 6 a M A (C) No ......... OF 2012

¶2

(APPEAL VALUED^ATRs.03,8 ,000/-)

¶3

APPEAL UNDER SECTIQN,1,73 OF THEIMQTOR^VEIHQLES AQIJ9^88J

¶4

APPELANT : (NON—^APPLICANT No. 2)

¶5

WAA“W
u
* \ \x
"*.”.“‘“ +%< w
W
é
RESPONDENTS
(APPLICANT No. 1)

¶6

:1.

¶7

United India Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch— Offlce, Raigarh, in front of Gopi Talkies, Distt.-Raigarh (C.G.).

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Thandaram Kurre, S/O^— Late Hariram Kurre, aged—42 years,

¶10

(APPLICANT^N02) :2.

¶11

Smt. Haivantin, W/o — Thandaram Kurre, aged—4O years,

¶12

Both are Safnami by caste.

¶13

Both are R/O— Village—Hirri, Tab.— Saranggarh, Distt.— Raigarh (C.G.)

¶14

(^{NON-APPLICANT} i3. Ajay Kumar Bhardwaj, S/O — No:1) Ishwarlal Bhardwaj , R/ O— Village—Reda, Tah.— Saranggarh, Distt.—Rajgarh (C.G.), (Owner of Vehicle Eicher Tractor CG13A'3691).

¶15

(^{NON-APPLICANT} :4. Dongar Singh, S/O ~Dakhru Not3) Satnami, aged—24 years, R/OVilllage—Bhanesar (Navapara), P.S.—Beltikar1', Distt.— Navapara (Orisa). (Driver^{of vehicle)}

¶16

W Being aggrleved by award dated 16/ 12/201 1 passed by Shr1 G.S. Kunjam, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saranggarh, Distt.Raigarh (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 10/2009 (between the parties Thandaram Kurre 81; another Vs. Ajay

¶17

APPELLANT hon—agghcam

¶18

No.2

¶19

: United India Insarancc Company Ltd.

¶20

VERS US

¶21

GRAL AWARD (Passed on 01.04.20] 3)

¶22

.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sarangarh, Distt Raigarh (for

¶23

¶24

bearing registration No. CG-l3-A—3691 by its driver Dongar Simngh; Ku. Pushpa Kurra died in the said accidem; appellant/Insurance Cmnpany 1iable for payment of compensation to the claimantS as it couid not estabiish violation of policy conditions; and assessed and awardad aforesaid sum as campensation to the claimants. Learned counsel for the appailant would submit: the Tribunal haS fallen in error in holding the appellant liable for payment of compensation as Driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and further the Tribunal has erred in deducting 1X3” only ' towards personal expenses of deceased in place of 1/2. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents supported the award impugned. l have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the award impugned including records of the Tribunal.

¶25

Nevertheless, the Tiibunal has certainly fallen in error in deducting only l/3‘d towards Personal expenses ofthe deceased, inasmuch as,

¶26

the Supreme Court in case ofSarla Verma (Salt) & others v. Delhi Transport Corporation & another‘, has held : if the deceased was a bachelor, one half (50%) of the income of deceased should be deducted towards personal^& living expenses of the deceased. Therefore, I propose to re—compute the amount of compensation.

¶27

As the Tribunal has assessed annual income of deceased as Rs. 36,000/-, after deducting 50 percent of the same towards her personal^{andlivingexpenses,theannuallossof dependencywould} be Rs. l8,000/-. By applying multiplier of 15 as applied by the Tribunal, the compensation on account of loss of dependency would be Rs. 2,70,000/- The claimants are further entitled to Rs. 30,000/on other heads (Rs. 10,000/each towards funeral expenses, loss ofestate and loss of consortium), thus, the claimants would become entitle for Rs. 3,00,000/— as compensation in place of Rs. 3,85,000/— as awarded by the Tribunal.

¶28

In view of above, the appeal is allowed in part. The award amount is modified and now in place of Rs. 3,85,000/— the claimants are entitled only for Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Ku. Pushpa Kurre. The above amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6 percent per^annumfrom the date of application till its actual payment.

¶29

The appellant/insurahce company is granted one month time to deposit the amount of compensation before the concerned

¶30

Tribunal. No order asto costs.

¶31

Sci/RLK“ Agarwal J udgew

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Thandaram Kurre and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Thandaram Kurre and Ors.

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

Bhajanlal Agrawal Vs State of C.G. and Another

Vinod Jaiswal Vs Jaimun Nisha Anors

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Arun Kumar Gupta

Vishal Singh Vs Khushiram Prajapati and Ors.

Dev Raj and Ors. Vs Nanki and Ors.

Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Sarojani and Ors.