Smt. Lata Devi Vs Karamjeet Singh

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

M.A.(C) No. 31 of 2018

¶4

Smt. Lata Devi, W/o Shatrughan @ Raj, aged about 38 Years, R/o Infront Of Quarter No. 167/ A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp1,Subhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh,

¶5

Shatrughan @ Raj, S/o Late Shiva, aged about 44 Years, R/o Infront Of Quarter No. 167/ A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp1,Subhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh,

¶6

Sunita Devi, S/o Shatrughan @ Raj, aged about 21 Years, R/o Infront Of Quarter No. 167/ A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp1,Subhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶7

Sushil, S/o Shatrughan @ Raj, aged about 13 Years, Minor Represented Through Appellant No.1, Mother R/o Infront Of Quarter No. 167/ A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp-1, Subhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, DistrictDurg, Chhattisgarh ...............Claimants

¶8

--- Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Karamjeet Singh, S/o Indrajeet Singh, aged about 25 Years, R/o Infront Of Quarter No. 167-A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp-I, Shubhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh .(Driver Of Vehicle No. C G-07 L J/6593)

¶11

Indrajeet Singh, S/o Shri Darshan Singh, aged about 45 Years, R/o Infront of Quarter No. 167-A, New Quarter, Shiv Mandir, Camp-I, Shubhash Chowk, Udiya Mohalla, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh .(Owner Of Vehicle No. C G-07 L J/6593)

¶12

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 16, R.S.S. Market, Power House, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh .(Insurer of Vehicle No. C.G.07 L J 6593)

¶13

--- Respondents

¶14

-2-

¶15

For Appellants : Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 & 2 : Shri S.K.Singh, Advocate appeared on behalf of Shri B.P.Singh, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Shri Raj Awasthi, Advocate

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board

¶17

12/02/2024

¶18

1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) by the appellants/claimants against the award dated 10/05/2017 passed by the Addl. Judge to the I Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, District – Durg(C.G.) in Claim Case No. 2499/2010.

¶19

2. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs.10,44,000/-, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.01,39,500/- as compensation in favour of the appellants / claimants on account of death of deceased Hemant Kumar in an unfortunate accident that occurred on 20/11/2009 by rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle personal motorcycle No. CG/07/LJ/6593 by respondent No. 1 / driver, owned by respondent No. 2 / owner and insured with respondent No.3 / Insurance Company.

¶20

3. As per pleadings of the claim application, filed under section 163-A of the MV Act, on 20/11/2009 deceased Hemant Kumar along with his friend as pillon rider going from Bhilai to Raipur by motorcycle. When they reached near Bhilai - 3 at about 13:00 hours respondent No.1 dashed the motorcycle with divider on roadside. As a result deceased Hemant Kumar sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. The deceased was a mason and was earning Rs.3,250/- per month.

¶21

4. The claim application was resisted by the respondents on various grounds including respondent No. 3 / Insurance Company taking a plea that there is violation of the terms and conditions of Insurance Policy. Hence, it is not liable to pay the compensation.

¶22

-3-

¶23

5. On the basis of above pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed issues and decided the same in favour of the appellants / claimants and held that the appellants / claimants are entitled to receive the compensation.

¶24

6. Learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submits that the yearly income of Rs.15,000/- taken by the learned Tribunal is absolutely on the lower side. He was a mason and was earning Rs.3250/- per month. Hence suitable enhancement may be made by this Court.

¶25

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 supports the award and submit that the application was filed under Section 163-A of the MV Act, therefore, the compensation as provided in the second schedule has been rightly awarded.

¶26

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and also perused the record.

¶27

9. As per pleadings of the claim application the deceased was earning Rs.3250/per month. The evidence brought on record is also in line of the claim application.

¶28

10. Considering the entire evidence available on record, number of dependents, date of accident, minimum wages prevailing at that time and age of the deceased, this court can safely hold the monthly income of deceased to Rs.3,000/-. Since the application was filed under section 163-A of the MV,

¶29

Act, the compensation is determined in the following manner :-

¶30

S.No.	Head	Calculation
1.	Income of the deceased @ 3000/- per month	Rs.36,000/- per annum (3000/- X 12)
2.	1/3 deduction for personal expenses	Rs.24,000/-(36000-12000)
3.	Multiplier of 18 to be applied	Rs.4,32,000/- (Rs.24,000 x 18)
6.	Towards loss of estate and funeral	Rs.4500/- (2500 + 2000)

¶31

-4-

¶32

expenses,
Total	Rs.04,36,500/-
compensation

¶33

11. Since the tribunal has already awarded Rs.01,39,500/-, after deducting the same from the above amount, the claimants are held entitled for additional compensation of Rs.2,97,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of appeal. The amount shall be deposited by respondent No.3 / Insurance company within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶34

12. Rs.1,25,000/-(one lakh twenty five thousand) each shall be invested in the name of appellant No. 1 and 2 as fixed deposit in a Nationalized Bank be invested for 2 years. Remaining amount shall be paid to appellant No.1 by bank transaction / account payee cheque. No premature withdrawal will be permitted without the leave of the learned Tribunal.

¶35

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

¶36

/ Sd/--

¶37

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶38

Ashish

Smt. Lata Devi v. Karamjeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Lata Devi v. Karamjeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Puniram Patle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Khunte Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganga Yadav Vs Punaram Yadav

Jitendra Pandey Vs Rajkumar Singh

Sarita Patel Vs Jugal Kishore Agrawal

Vikash Tiwari Vs Nirmal Kumar Jain