Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Naushad Naz & Ors.

This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company assailing the Award dated 14^th October 2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (‘ MACT ’) in DAR No.551/2016, by which, the compensation of Rs.28,90,300 /- was awarded along with interest @ 9% per annum.

¶14

MAC.APP. 92/2026 Page 1 of 4

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Da te:2 8.02.2026 12:02:55

¶17

Ms. Sunanda Nimisha , counsel for appellant, at the outset, contends that by the impugned award, the MACT calculated the interest from date of filing till the date of award as Rs.18,68,521 /- and computed the total amount payable as Rs. 47,58,821/- ( i.e., Rs. 28,90,300/- plus Rs. 18,68,521/- ) . However, in paragraph 35 of the impugned award, the compensation is stated to be Rs. 47,58,821/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, which is clearly an error.

¶18

Notwithstanding that an amendment application has been moved by counsel for appellant before the MACT, it is crystal clear that contention on this issue should not brook any further delay. The compensation awarded, as per paragraph 32 of the impugned award, is Rs. 28,90,300/-, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The component of interest separately calculated by the MACT in paragraph 33 is unnecessary, as interest ought to be calculated directly @ 9% per annum on Rs. 28,90,300/- from date of filing of petition till realization to avoid any confusion in computation.

¶19

The award, to that extent, is modified.

¶20

As regards the other issue relating to the benchmark income of deceased being taken by the MACT at Rs.15,000/- , Ms. Sunanda Nimisha , counsel for appellant, states that the evidence placed on record could not have sustained a finding of Rs.15,000/- and minimum wages ought to have been awarded.

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Da te:2 8.02.2026 12:02:55

¶23

MAC.APP. 92/2026 Page 2 of 4

¶24

In response, Ms. Aruna Mehta, Advocate, who appears on advance notice for claimant, has presented the evidence of PW-3 / Ms. Naushad Naz ( wife of deceased ), who stated that her husband was working as a tailor with S.K. Tailors and getting a salary of Rs.15,000/- . PW3 deposed that deceased was engaged in cutting and stitching gents’ suits, coats, sherwani , pyjama, shirts, pants, etc. Further, PW3 stated that the employer of deceased was satisfied with his work and that father of the deceased was also a tailor master, and deceased had learnt tailoring from his father. Initially, the employer was paying deceased Rs.12,000/- and after one year, the salary was increased to Rs.15,000/- and would have increased further. She also stated that deceased wanted to open his own shop in five years and his income would have increased to Rs.30,000 /-.

¶25

In the cross-examination by counsel for Insurance Company, PW3 sustained her statement regarding the income of her husband. She stated that the deceased was getting salary in cash and had studied up to Class IX. She rebutted any suggestion that deceased was not working as a tailor or was not earning Rs.15,000 /- per month. 8. The other evidence which has been relied upon is of PW-4 / Mr. Javed Akhtar alias Guddu ( proprietor of the tailoring shop named SK Tailor ), who stated in his evidence that the deceased late Mohd. Abid was working as a tailor since June 2013 till the date of accident and was being paid Rs.15,000 /- per month. Signatures of Mohd. Abid were taken on voucher receipts at the time of giving him salary, and these were

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Da te:2 8.02.2026 12:02:55

¶28

MAC.APP. 92/2026 Page 3 of 4

¶29

exhibited as PW-2/1 . He also stated that deceased had a very bright future and presently tailors are getting salary of Rs.20,000 /- per month. 9. In cross-examination, PW-4 sustained his testimony. He clearly stated that Mohd. Abid joined the shop on 13^th June 2013 as tailor master/ karigar and vouchers were issued which were signed by the deceased/ Mohd. Abid , these vouchers form part of the Trial Court record, which has been presented by Ms. Aruna Mehta to this Court. The Court has perused the same and find that the vouchers have been initially signed for Rs.12,000 /- on 2^nd March 2014 and since April 2014 for Rs.15,000 /-.

¶30

Accordingly, the evidence seems to be robust, substantial and sufficient in order to uphold the benchmark income of Rs. 15,000/- as taken by the MACT.

¶31