Insurer appealed a MACT award of compensation in a fatal accident case, confining its challenge to adjustment of an amount already paid to the widow before filing of the DAR. The Court directed that Rs.4 lacs plus interest be released to the insurer and the balance to the claimants per the award scheme.
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.
$~16
+ MAC.APP. 47/2021 & CM APPL. 2680/2021
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr. Mohammad Mustifa, Ms.Arpita Biswas and Mr. Md. Maroof, Advocates.
versus
KHUSHABU DEVI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral)
MAC.APP. 47/2021 Page 1 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAGYA ARORA Signing Da te:0 7.08.2025 14:53:50
“14. The claimants are the widow, children and mother of deceased Sh. Lalan Yadav. Smt. Khushabu Devi widow of deceased appeared in witness box as PW-2. She deposed that the deceased was aged about 24 years at the time of accident and he was working as Labour and was earning Rs.10,000/per month. She further deposed that all the petitioners were financially dependent upon the earnings of deceased. She has relied upon the following documents:
| Sr.No. | Description of documents | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | DAR | Ex. PW2/1 (Colly) |
| 2. | Copy of her Aadhaar Card | Ex. PW2/2 |
| 3. | Copies of Aadhar Card of children of deceased |
Ex. PW2/3 (Colly) |
| 4. | Copy of voter I card of deceased | Mark A |
15. During her cross examination on behalf of insurance company, she admitted that she had already received a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- from the insurance company prior to the filing of DAR . She denied the suggestion that the said amount was wrongly paid to the petitioners or that insurance company is entitled to recover the same from them. She further deposed that she could not produce any documentary proof to show that deceased was working as labourer or he was
Signature Not Verified
MAC.APP. 47/2021 Page 2 of 4
Digitally Signed By:PRAGYA ARORA Signing Da te:0 7.08.2025 14:53:50
earning Rs. 10,000/- per month at the time of accident. She deposed that her father in law had predeceased her husband. She denied the suggestion that her mother in law was not residing with her son at the time of accident. She volunteered that she was residing with them at their native place in Bihar and deceased was residing and working for gain in Delhi. She further deposed that she could not produce any proof to show that deceased was actually residing or working for gain at Delhi at the time of accident. She admitted that in copy of voter I card of deceased, his residential address is mentioned as that of Bihar. He denied the suggestion that deceased was not working for gain in Delhi at the time of accident. He further denied the suggestion that deceased was unemployed or that he was not earning anything at the time of accident.”
5. None appears on behalf of the Respondents despite service.
“6. In the meantime, the appellant shall deposit the entire awarded amount with the Tribunal within a period of three weeks from today and out of the deposited amount, the Tribunal shall release the compensation amount after holding back a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards the amount already paid and Rs.1,20,000/- towards the amount awarded for ‘Loss of Consortium’
7. The Tribunal shall also release the interest calculated @6% per annum in terms of the scheme of disbursal stipulated in the subject Award and the balance amount shall be kept in an interest-bearing fixed deposit. ”
[Emphasis supplied]
Signature Not Verified
MAC.APP. 47/2021 Page 3 of 4
Digitally Signed By:PRAGYA ARORA Signing Da te:0 7.08.2025 14:53:50
the limited challenge in this Appeal, this Court deems it apposite to dispose of the Appeal directing that after deducting a sum of Rs.4 lacs from the amounts already deposited, the amounts inclusive of up-to-date interest on Rs.4 lacs shall be released in favour of the Appellant/Insurance Company. The balance remaining, inclusive of up-to-date interest thereon, shall be released in favour of the Respondent/Claimant(s) in accordance with the scheme as set out in the Impugned Award.
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
JULY 14, 2025/pa
Signature Not Verified
MAC.APP. 47/2021 Page 4 of 4
Digitally Signed By:PRAGYA ARORA Signing Da te:0 7.08.2025 14:53:50
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Rs.4,50,000 already paid by the insurer to a claimant prior to the DAR should be adjusted against the awarded compensation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Khushabu Devi
Respondents No. 2 onwards (Khushabu Devi & Ors.)
Tara Vitasta Ganju
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
