Ganga Yadav Vs Punaram Yadav

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MAC No. 404 of 2019

¶5

Ganga Yadav D/o Jagdish Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Rohansi Thana Palari District Baloudabazar, Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam Mahadevghat Road District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. .........Claimant

¶6

---- Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Punaram Yadav S/o Jagdish Yadav R/o Village And Post Rohansi Thana Palari District Baloudabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ..........Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C. G.04/ F. J. /3256..........Driver

¶9

Jagdish Yadav S/o Tijau Ram Yadav R/o Village And Post Rohansi Thana Palari District Baloudabazar, Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. .........Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C. G. 04 /f. J. /3256. .........Owner

¶10

The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Divisional Manager (Divisional No. 2) The New India Insurance Company Limited, Behind Of Life Insurance Office Pandri Thana Palari District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...........Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C. G. 04/ F. J. / 3256. ......Insurer

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Appellant : Shri A.L.Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Shri N.K.Malviya, Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶14

Order On Board

¶15

09/02/2024

¶16

Challenging award dated 26/06/2018 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) in Motor Accident claim case No.330/2016, the appellant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘M.V.Act’) on account of death of her mother in an accident that occurred on 03/01/2016 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (motor cycle) bearing registration No.CG-04- FJ-3256 driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3.

¶17

As per claim application, the deceased was aged about 42 years and she

¶18

2

¶19

was earning Rs.9000/- per month by selling vegetables, therefore, total compensation of Rs.19,94,000/- was claimed. The claim application was resisted by respondent No.1 and 2 on various grounds and Respondent No.3 / insurance company took a plea that the offending vehicle was being driven without valid permit. It was also pleaded that the vehicle was being driven in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.

¶20

On the basis of above broad pleadings, learned Tribunal framed issues, decided those issues in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded aforestated compensation of Rs.6,06,000/-.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the monthly income of the deceased has been taken on lower side. It is also submitted that the amount of compensation on all other heads is also on the lower side. Therefore, it is prayed that suitable enhancement may be made.

¶22

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 supports the award and submits that just compensation has been awarded and there is no need to interfere with the award.

¶23

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

¶24

Considering the age of the deceased and evidence available, the monthly income of the deceased is taken as Rs.5,500/-. Taking guidance from the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and ors., (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and ors, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and ors., (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court hereby computes the compensation in the following manner -

¶25

1	Monthly salary	Rs.5500/-
2	Future prospects (5500 + 1375)	25% Rs.6875/-

¶26

3

¶27

3	Yearly income (6875x12)	Rs.82500/-
4	1/3rd deduction for personal expenses (82500-27500)	Rs.55000/-
5.	Multiplier of 14 (55000 X 14)	Rs.770000/-
6.	Funeral expenses + loss of Estate	+Rs.30000/-
7.	Filial Consortium	+Rs.40000/-
	TOTAL COMPENSATION	Rs.8,40,000/-

¶28

The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.6,06,000/- which is deducted from the total compensation now awarded and the enhanced compensation comes to Rs.2,34,000/- . Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, interest @ 6% is also awarded on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of appeal to be deposited by the insurance company within a period of 60 days. After the amount of compensation is deposited, Rs.2.25 lakhs be invested in the name of appellant for three years as fixed deposit in a Nationalised Bank. Remaining amount shall be paid to appellant No.1 through Bank transaction / account payee cheque.

¶29

The appeal is accordingly partly allowed.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge

¶32

Deepti

Ganga Yadav v. Punaram Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganga Yadav v. Punaram Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phanendra Kumar Sahu Vs Neeraj Pathak

Smt Pinki Chowdhary Vs Mishra Rana Singh

Vijay Bahadur Singh Vs Satya Prakash Sahu

Puniram Patle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Khunte Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rathram Sahu Vs Anish Kumar Singh