Partly allowed

Smt. Kamla v. Vikas

Chhattisgarh HC6 Mar 2024MAC/225/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation for death in a road accident. The court raised monthly income to minimum wage of Rs. 8,450, applied 1/3 deduction for personal expenses, maintained multiplier 9, and added parental consortium of Rs. 40,000 each to the children, enhancing compensation from Rs. 9,60,375 to Rs. 15,13,455.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 9,60,375 to Rs. 15,13,455; additional Rs. 5,53,080 with 6% interest payable by insurer within 60 days.

Smt. Kamla Vs Vikas — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

H IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MAC No. 225 of 2020

¶5

Smt. Kamla Wd/o Harish Kumar Raikesh Aged About 50 Years R/o Hemunagar Bandhwapara Beside Sindhi Gurudawara, P.S. Torwa District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶6

Pradeep S/o Late Harish Kumar Raikesh Aged About 31 Years R/o Hemunagar Bandhwapara Beside Sindhi Gurudawara, P.S. Torwa District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶7

Vikas S/o Late Harish Kumar Raikesh Aged About 28 Years R/o Hemunagar Bandhwapara Beside Sindhi Gurudawara, P.S. Torwa District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶8

4. Vanshika Alias Manju W/o Dilip Vadhwani Aged About 32 Years R/o Chakarbhatha Camp District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Vikas S/o Ramesh Patra Aged About 19 Years R/o Domuhani P.S. Torwa District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Vehicle Car No. Cg 10 Af 9777), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

A. Shriniwas Rao S/o Late Venkteswarlu Aged About 45 Years R/o - RTS Colony Quarter No. 520/1 P.S. Torwa District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, (Owner Of Vehicle Car No. Cg 10 Af 9777), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Branch Raipur Address -Ground Floor Commercial Building Near HDFC Devendra Nagar Road, Sector 03 Devendra Nagar Raipur District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh, (Insurance Company Of Vehicle Car No. Cg 10 Af 9777), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents

¶13

For the Appellants : Mr. F.S. Khare, Adv. For respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ashish Shukla, Adv For respondent No. 3 : Mr. Abhijeet Mishra, Adv.

¶14

_____________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Order on Board

¶15

¶16

07.03.2024

¶17

This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed challenging the award dated 21.10.2019 passed by the learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG) in Claim Case No. 719/2018.

¶18

By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 9,60,375/- as compensation to the appellants/claimants, on account of death of deceased Harish Kumar Raikesh in an unfortunate accident which took place on 27.02.2018 when the deceased was going by his motorcycle to Vyapar Vihar and he reached near CMD college chowk near Vidya Nagar, the respondent No. 1 who was driving the offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the deceased, due to which, the deceased received serious and grievous injuries, he was admitted in the hospital but due to injuries, the deceased succumbed on 16.03.2018. The offending vehicle was insured by respondent No. 3 and owned by respondent No. 2 and drove by respondent No. 1.

¶19

As per the pleadings of the claim application filed under Section 166 of the MV Act, the deceased used to run a shop of grocery and used to earn Rs. 20,000/- per month. The appellants/claimants being widow, and children of the deceased had filed the claim application claiming total compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- before the Tribunal.

¶20

The claim application was resisted by respondents/driver, owner and insurance company of the offending vehicle on various grounds.

¶21

The learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed issues and after appreciation of evidence and material available on record awarded the compensation as stated above.

¶22

¶23

Learned counsel for appellants/claimants submits that the impugned award by the claims Tribunal is bad in law, perverse, thus liable to be modified and enhanced.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants further argued that the appellants/claimants have pleaded that the monthly income of the deceased was assessed by the Tribunal as Rs. 5000/- per month, which is on lower side, while at the time of incident the deceased was earning Rs. 20,000/- per month. He also submits that keeping in view the number of dependents, the learned Tribunal had wrongly assessed and deducted 1/2 towards personal expenses Apart from this, the compensation awarded on other heads is also on the lower side. In support of his contention, he relied on Kurvan Ansari Alias Kurvan Ali and Another Versus Shyam Kishor Murmu and Another in (2022) 1 SCC 317 in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that claimants are entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- each towards loss of filial consortium and spousal loss of consortium and accordingly, this claim petition is also entitled for suitable enhancement.

¶25

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 supported the award and submits that the compensation has rightly been awarded and does not require any interference by this Court.

¶26

The respondents No. 1 in his written statement submitted that respondent No. 1 was driving the offending vehicle in a very controlled and slow speed. He was not responsible about the aforementioned accident. The complaints are making false allegation in order to get more compensation. At the time of accident, he was having an effective and valid license. The offending vehicle was insured with

¶27

¶28

respondent No. 3. Therefore, if any liability arises, it should be fastened upon respondent No. 3.

¶29

10.Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶30

Learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the appellant/claimant to Rs. 5,000/- per month, in the opinion of this Court, which needs to be modified as prescribed in minimum wages rate to Rs. 8450/- at the time of accident i.e. on 27.02.2018. On perusal of record, this Court finds that the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the future prospect of 10% as the deceased was aged about 56 years. Looking to the age of the deceased which was 56 years at the time of incident, the Claims Tribunal has applied an appropriate multiplier of 9 which is hereby maintained. This Court is of the opinion that 1/3rd deduction towards personal expenses is granted instead of 1/2, as he was a married man left behind two children and wife. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral and last rites expenses of the deceased and Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate and Rs. 5,93,375/- is awarded towards medical expenses. However, the tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- towards spousal loss of consortium only, but has not granted any amount towards parental loss of consortium which in the opinion of this Court should be benefited under the head of parental loss of consortium.

¶31

12.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record and in the light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors; (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and others reported

¶32

¶33

in (2017) 16 SCC 680, Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, and Kurvan Ansari Alias Kurvan Ali and Another Versus Shyam Kishor Murmu and Another in (2022) 1 SCC 317, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:-

¶34

Sl. No.	Particular	Awarded by this Court
1.	Monthly Income of the deceased	Rs. 8450/-
2.	Future Prospects @ 10%	Rs.845/-
3.	Total Income monthly	Rs. 10140/-
4.	Personal expenditure(1/3^th)	Rs. 3380/-
5.	Totalyearlyincome	(6760 X 12)= Rs. 81,120/-
6.	Multiplier of 9 applied to assess total loss of dependency	Rs. 7,30,080/-
7	Spousal consortium ( for Appellant No. 1)	Rs. 40,000/-
8.	Parental consortium (for Appellant No. 2 to 4)	(Rs. 40,000/- each) Total Rs. 1,20,000/-
7.	Funeral Expenses	Rs. 15000/-
8.	Lost of estate	Rs.15000/-
	Medical Expenses	Rs. 5,93,375
	Total Compensation	Rs. 15,13,455/-

¶35

For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 9,60,375/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs.15,13,455/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 9,60,375/-, the claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 5,53,080/-, the additional amount shall carry interest @6% per annum from the date of claim application. The insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation within 60 days.

¶36

¶37

The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. On deposit tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the enhance amount of compensation. Rest of the conditions shall remain intact as ordered by the Claims Tribunal.

¶38

15.Appeal thus partly allowed.

¶39

Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶40

Jyoti

Smt. Kamla v. Vikas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kamla v. Vikas

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

Intkhaab Vs Shivprasad

Dinesh Kumar Verma Vs Smt. Sangeeta Agarwal @ Sangeeta Sasika

Dr. Kamal Singh Saite Vs Shri Virendra Padhi

Rahul Gandhi Vs Sanjay Ramchandani

Chandro Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakhmu Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh