Allowed

Smt.Asha Tiwari v. Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia

Chhattisgarh HC3 Apr 2014MAC/204/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal against an award dated 25.8.2007 in a death claim case. The court held that the Tribunal wrongly assessed the deceased's income and failed to award for future prospects. Consequently, it enhanced the compensation from Rs.8,07,500/- to Rs.11,03,000/- by applying a 30% addition for future prospects and using a multiplier of 15.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award is modified; appellants entitled to total compensation of Rs.11,03,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a.

Smt.Asha Tiwari Vs Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia — Execution and Attachment | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

BEFORE THE HON*BLE fflGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH AT BILASPUR

¶2

c. ^ Misc. Appeal^No.

¶3

¶4

l.Smt. Asha Thrari Age-35 Years , W/oLateH.P.TIWARI

¶5

2.Ku. Akansha Twari Age 10 Years

¶6

Daughter ofLate H.P.TIWARI

¶7

)W-^ 3. Ku. Anamika Twari AgegYears ^^^ste^sw^^^^^^ ^-^

¶8

Smfc Tilak Devi W/o Ute L.N.Tiwari Age -80 Yeais

¶9

''•-4,

¶10

¶11

All R/o Qr. No. 03-B, Street No.21, Sector No.l

Bhilai,Durg(C.G.),

•••Appeltonts

Vrs.

Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia S/o Fatteh Singh Bhatia Age- 44 Years, Resident ofBaldevBagh,

¶16

Bhatia ' ..l^v ^^ ^••;^y.y. ^•'.^"..-v ^:;^ ^A.--'y'

¶17

¶18

District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.)

¶19

Gurusharan Sillgh Bhatia

¶20

S/o Fatteh Singh Bhatia

¶21

^Resident ofBaldevBagh,

¶22

^Q^-^^District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) x^^ '^^ss Branch Manager/ Inchai^e, Manager/ Inchai^e, Inchai^e,

¶23

Branch Manager/ Inchai^e, Manager/ Inchai^e, Inchai^e,

¶24

New fadia Insurance Co- Ltd.,

¶25

Divisional OfiBce, Rajnangaon

¶26

•••Respondettts

¶27

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vchicle Act. 1988. For Enhancement of Award,

¶28

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶29

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker

¶30

M.A.(C) No. 204 of 2008

¶31

Appellants Smt. Asha Tiwari and others

¶32

VERSUS

¶33

Respondents Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia and others

¶34

Present:

¶35

Shri CK Sahu, counsel for the appeHants. None for respondents No. 1 & 2.

¶36

Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.3.

¶37

ORDER

¶38

(03rd^April,2014)

¶39

This appeal arises out ofthe award dated 25.8.2007 passed by the 9th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Durg (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in claim case No.50/06 whereby in a death case compensation of Rs.8,07,500/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants.

¶40

Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 10.2.2006 when deceased Hariprasad Tiwari was riding his motorcycle, he was dashed by a truck bearing registration No. C.G.08 ZC 0374 (hereinafter referred to as "offending vehilce") resiilting in his instantaneous death. At the relevant time, the offending vehicle was being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, owned by respondent No.2 and duly insured with respondent No.3.

¶41

A claim case was filed by claimants, who are widow and two minor daughters and mother of the deceased, claiming compensation of Rs.87.97 lacs, inter alia, pleading that at the relevant time, the deceased was aged about 35 years, was working as sales representatives with one Baidhnath Ayurved Company, getting monthly salary of Rs.10,000/- per month and died in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle and therefore, the claimants are entitled for compensation as claimed.

¶42

¶43

The respondents/driver & owner of the vehicle did not file their written statements. remained absent and therefore, were proceeded ex-parte. The respondent/insurance company by filing its written statement denied its liability on the ground that the deceased himself was negligent in causing the accident and therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation.

¶44

However, the Tribunal after^ appreciation of the evidence on record by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.8,07,5007- in favour of the claimants along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application till realization.

¶45

Contention of learned counsel for the appellants is as under:

¶46

(i) that while calculating compensation, the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/whereas as per salary slip, he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month and this apart, he was also earning Rs.4,000/- by taking tuition;

¶47

(ii) that age of the deceased has wrpngty been assessed by the Tribunat as between 35-40 years whereas he was 35 years of age on the date of accident;

¶48

(iii) that no amount whatsoever towards future prospects of the deceased has been awarded by the Tribunal;

¶49

(iv) that under the conventional heads alsothe Tribunal has awarded compensation on the lower side;

¶50

On the other hand, supporting the impugned award it has been argued on behalf of learned counsel for the respondenVinsurance company that in the salary document of the deceased, his TA bill and other amount has also been included and therefore, the Tribunal was justified in deducting that amount from the salary while calculating compensation. Likewise, there is no evidence that the deceased was earning Rs.4,000/by taking tuition. As such, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and calls for no interference.

¶51

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶52

^l^"^1 ^.-..^ ^

¶53

So far as assessment of income of the deceased is concerned, from the salary document as filed by the claimants, it appears that certain TA bill ofthe deceased has also been included, which under no circumstances can be taken into consideration for ascertaining the monthly income of the deceased. Likewise, there is no cogent legally admissible evidence with regard to earning of the deceased from tuition. Thus, the Tribunal was fully justified in assessing monthly income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month. If this income is taken into consideration, the yearly income of the deceased comes to Rs.72,000/-.

¶54

However, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future prospects and thus keeping in view the law laid down in Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and others, 2012 AIR SCW 2892, Rajesh and others Vs. Rajbir Singh and others, reported in II (2013) ACC 841 (SC) and recentjudgment ofthe Supreme Court in Savita Vs. Bindar Singh and others, 2014 Lawsuit (SC) 210, considering the age of the deceased, there has to be addition of 30% to the monthly income towards future prospetcts. Thus after adding 30%, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.7,800/- i.e. Rs.93,600/- p.a. Since the deceased is survived by four dependents, in view of law laid down in Sar/a Verma (Smt.) and others Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, 1/4th is to be deducted from the annual income of the deceased towards his personal and living expenses. After making such deduction, the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs.70,200/-. Considering the age of the deceased at the time of his death i.e. 38 years, in view of guidelines of the Apex Court in Sar/a Verma, (supra), multiplier of 15 is applicable in this case. After applying this multiplier, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.10,53,000/-. As regards the amount awarded under conventional heads, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the same appears to be on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to Rs.50,000/- in lump sum. It is enhanced accordingly.

¶55

'^,. •;'tf^ ^ ;g@l, ' ^ ^/'

¶56

On the basis of aforesaid discussions, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.11,03,000/- and since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.8,07,500/- after deducting the same the appellants are entitled for enhancement of Rs.2,95,500/-. This additional amount of compensation shall carry the interest @ 6% p.a. as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.

¶57

In the result, the appeal is ailowed and the award impugned stands modified to the above extent.

¶58

Sd/Pritinker Diwakar Judge

¶59

Smt.Asha Tiwari v. Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Asha Tiwari v. Rajinder Pal Singh Bhatia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Vs Kawal Prasad and Anr.

Kamla Bai Vs Mohan Kumar and Ors.

Sohan Lal Dahaliya Vs Smt.Savitri Bai

Sanju @ Sanjay Kumar Sahu Vs Gendu Gond and Others

Anand Roadways Vs Smt. Triveni Bai Kunjam and Ors.

Bajaj Alliances General Insurance Co. Vs Gendu Gond and Others