Allowed

Kavita Sahu v. Krishna Kumar

Chhattisgarh HC11 Aug 2023MAC/1468/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this motor accident claim appeal, the High Court recalculated compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the death of a deceased driver. Applying Supreme Court precedents, the court enhanced the sum to ₹13,15,000/- by adding future prospects and correcting conventional heads.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 1,315,000/- including future prospects, funeral, estate, and consortium.

Kavita Sahu Vs Krishna Kumar — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1468 of 2015

¶5

Kavita Sahu, W/o Late Ashwani Sahu, Aged about 31 Years,

¶6

Ku. Anchal @ Amba Sahu, D/o Late Ashwani Sahu, Aged about 12 Years,

¶7

Ku. Akansha Sahu, D/o Late Ashwani Sahu, Aged about 11 Years,

¶8

Fuleshwari Bai, W/o Late Mohan Sahu, Aged about 52 Years,

¶9

Appellants No.2 and 3 are minor, represented through natural guardian mother Smt. Kavita Sahu,

¶10

All are R/o Village Bhadi, Police Station- Seepat, Tahsil and DistrictBilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

---- Appellants/Claimants

¶12

Versus

¶13

Krishna Kumar, S/o Shri Shivmohan Singh Gond, Aged about 30 Years, R/o Village Devbhog, Police Station- Deepka, District Korba Chhattisgarh, temporary address Village Khairmaina (House of Kripal Singh), Chowki Urga, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

( Driver of vehicle Truck Trailer No. CG 12 S 0346)

¶15

M/s Sarvamangla Construction, 106 Stadium Road, T.P. Nagar, Korba, Tahsil and District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

( Owner of vehicle Truck Trailer No. CG 12 S 0346)

¶17

The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office- Medekar Complex, Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶18

( Insurer of vehicle Truck Trailer No. CG 12 S 0346)

¶19

Smt. Sindhiya Sharma, W/o Anil Sharma, C/o Vandematram Bus Service, Bus Stand, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶20

( Owner vehicle Bus No. CG 10 G 0396)

¶21

¶22

Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Rama Trade Center, in front of Rajeev Plaza, Bus Stand, Bilapsur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶23

( Insurer vehicle Bus No. CG 10 G 0396).

¶24

__________________________	---- Respondents _________________________________
For Appellants/Claimants	: Shri A.L. Singroul, Advocate
For Respondent No.3	: Shri Dashrath Gupta, Advocate
For Respondent No.5	: Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate

¶25

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

¶26

Order On Board

¶27

11/08/2023

¶28

This appeal has been preferred by the Appellants/Claimants. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 21.01.2015 passed by the 6^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No.117/2013, whereby the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.8,85,000/in favour of the Claimants/Appellants.

¶29

Before the Tribunal, the Claimants/Appellants filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming total compensation amount of Rs.25,60,500/- under various heads on account of death of Ashwani Sahu.

¶30

Facts of the case are that on 11.10.2011, deceased Ashwani Sahu while driving the vehicle bus bearing registration No. CG 10 G 0396 came from Korba to Bilaspur near Village- Kohadiya dashed by

¶31

¶32

offending vehicle Trailer Truck bearing registration No.CG 12 S 0346 driven by respondent No.1 rashly and negligently. According to the pleadings, the deceased was working as Driver, earning Rs.7,000/per month and he was aged about 37 years. After recording evidence, the Tribunal passed the award amount of Rs.8,85,000/-. Hence, this appeal has been preferred by the Appellants/Claimants for enhancement of the compensation amount.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the Appellants/Claimants submits that while assessing the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has not added any amount towards his future prospects. Referring to the case of National Insurance Company Limited Versus Pranay Sethi and Others (2017) 16 SCC 680, it is argued that 40% of the established monthly income of the deceased should be added in the head of future prospects as the deceased was aged about 37 years. He further submits that in other conventional heads also the Tribunal has awarded much less amount.

¶34

Learned counsels appearing for the Insurance Company oppose the above argument raised by counsel for the Appellants/Claimants.

¶35

None for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4.

¶36

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record of the Claim Tribunal and other materials available on record minutely.

¶37

¶38

There is no dispute on the point that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 37 years. On careful perusal of the award, it also shows that while assessing the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has not added any amount towards his future prospects. In the light of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra), 40% of the income should be added towards his future prospects as he was below 40 years of age at the time of accident and was a self employed person. On addition of 40% of the established income of the deceased, monthly income of the deceased comes Rs.5,000/- + Rs.2,000/- (40% of 5,000 = 2,000) = Rs.7,000/-.

¶39

From the above monthly income Rs.7,000/- after deduction of 1/4 towards personal expenses of the deceased, the amount becomes Rs.5,250/- (Rs.7,000 - Rs.1,750) and yearly income of the deceased becomes Rs.5,250 x 12 = Rs.63,000/-. Multiplier of 15 has been used by the Tribunal which is proper. By using multiplier of 15, total amount of Rs.9,45,000/- towards loss of income.

¶40

With regard to the other conventional head, the Tribunal has granted Rs.10,000/- for funeral expenses, Rs.10,000/- for loss of estate and granted Rs.10,000/- for spousal consortium to Appellant/ Claimant No.1-wife of the deceased, which is not accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130.

¶41

¶42

Instead of that the Appellants/Claimants are entitled to get Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and besides loss of dependency, Appellants/Claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- as consortium (Rs.40,000/- for each Claimant).

¶43

Looking to the above observations, now I am recalculating the

¶44

compensation which should be awarded:

¶45

S.No.	Heads	Calculation (in rupees)
1.	Loss of income	Rs.9,45,000/-
2.	Towards Medical Expenses Rs.1,80,000/-	Rs.1,80,000/-
3.	Towards Consortium for Appellants/Claimants = Rs.40,000/- each	Rs. 40,000/- x 4 = Rs.1,60,000/-
4.	Towards other Conventional Heads : For Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/-	Rs.15,000/-
5.	Loss of Estate = Rs.15,000/-	Rs.15,000/-
6.	Total Compensation amount	Rs. 1,315,000/-

¶46

Now, the Appellants/Claimants are entitled to get total compensation

¶47

amount of Rs.1,315,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakh Fifteen Thousands

¶48

Only) instead of Rs.8,85,000/-. The remaining part of the award so far as the rate of interest etc. is concerned, shall remain intact.

¶49

¶50

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the impugned award to the above extent.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

¶53

Vasant

Kavita Sahu v. Krishna Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavita Sahu v. Krishna Kumar

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

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Ku. Archana And Ors.

Ku. Archana and Ors. Vs Basant Gupta and Anr.

Smt. Indiya Bai Vs Gajendra Kumar

Mukhdev Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Parmeshwar and Ors.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Maheshwari and Ors.