High Court set aside part of the compensation award in a motor accident claim case, enhancing the amount and directing the insurer to pay the compensation directly before recovering it from the owner and driver despite policy deviation.
Compensation enhanced; insurer directed to pay entire amount to claimants and recover from owner and driver.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MAC No. 21 of 2016
---- Appellants/claimants
---- Respondents
| For Appellants | : Shri AL Singroul, Advocate. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent No.1 & 2 | : None. |
| For Respondent No.3 | : Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. |
Hon'ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya, J
Judgment On Board
08/04/2019
This appeal is by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award 27.11.2015 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mungeli, in Claim Case No.43/2003 awarding total compensation of Rs.3,69,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization, fastening liability on non-applicants No. 1 & 2/driver & owner jointly and severally while exonerating non-applicant No.3/insurance company.
Tractor bearing No. CG 10A 2669 & Trolley bearing No.CG 10A 2670 by sitting on its mudguard. As the said vehicle was being driven by non-applicant No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, it turned turtle resulting in grievous injuries to Chhammanlal leading to his death on the spot itself. At the time of accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant No.2 and insured with non-applicant No.3.
(i) that no amount towards future prospect has been granted to the claimants.
(ii) that the amount awarded under the conventional heads also being on the lower side deserves to be enhanced suitably.
(iii) that the insurance company has wrongly been exonerated of its liability. Alternatively, he submits that if this Court comes to the conclusion that exoneration of the insurance company is proper, then order of pay and recover may be passed in this case because the claimants have till date not received any amount as compensation.
In support of above contention, reliance has been placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Smt. Sarla Verma and others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Shivaraj Vs. Rajendra and another, 2018 (4) TAC 1 (SC) .
conditions. He submits that there is no scope for enhancement in this case and that the Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased whereas considering the fact that the deceased was bachelor, the deduction should have been 50%.
| Sl. No. |
Heads | Calculation (in rupees) |
|---|---|---|
| 01. | Income of the deceased @ Rs.3,000/- per month. |
36,000/ per annum |
| 02. | 40% of (i) above to be added towards future prospects. |
36,000 + 14,400 = 50,400/- |
| 03. | 50% deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased |
25,200/- |
| 04. | Multiplier of 18 to be applied | 4,53,600/- |
| 05. | Towards loss of estate & funeral expenses |
30,000/- |
| Total compensation | 4,83,600/- |
Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.3,69,500/- after deducting the same from the above amount, the claimants are held entitled for additional compensation of Rs.1,14,100/- with interest @
6% per annum from the date of application till realization.
Sd/
(Gautam Chourdiya)
Judge
Khan
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is sufficient given the deceased was a bachelor earning Rs. 3000 per month.
Whether the insurance company can be exonerated from liability due to deviation from the intended use of the insured vehicle.
Whether the insurance company is directed to pay the compensation directly and recover it from the owner and driver.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and anotherRelied on¶31
Smt. Sarla Verma and others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 · Who else cites this
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay SethiRelied on¶31
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 · Who else cites this
Shivaraj v. Rajendra and anotherRelied on¶27
Shivaraj Vs. Rajendra and another, 2018 (4) TAC 1 (SC)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Thanu Ram
Krishna Bai
Kumari Brihaspati
Lekhram
Ram Sharan
The National Insurance Company Limited
Gautam Chourdiya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Gautam Chourdiya
Parties & counsel
