Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Musstt Minara Begum Laskar and 2 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010136072017

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:2542

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : MFA/143/2017

¶6

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

¶7

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE A 25/27 ASAF ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI 110002 AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI 7, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

MUSSTT MINARA BEGUM LASKAR and 2 ORS W/O MD. SIRAJUL HAQUE LASKAR

¶10

2:SIRAJUL HAQUE LASKAR

¶11

S/O LATE KHALILUR RAHMAN LASKAR BOTH RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 ARE R/O VILL. SEWT PT-I P.O. BIHARA BAZAR P.S. KATIGORAH DIST. CACHAR ASSAM.

¶12

3:SMTI LALREM SIAMI NGAMLAI

¶13

WO SRI D. NAIDING R/O NEAR FISHERY OFFICER HAFLONG P.O. and P.S. UMRANGSO DIST. DIMA HASAO ASSAM OWNER OF VEHICEL BOLERO NO. AS-08-634

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S DUTTA, MR.C SHARMA,MR.N KALITA,MR.SIDHANT DUTTA,MS.N MODI

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. M TALUKDAR(R-1,2), MR.S CHOUDHURY(R- 1&2),MR.S D

¶16

Page No.# 2/5

¶17

PURAKAYATHA(R- 1&2)

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 11-03-2025

¶21

Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellants along with Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶22

This is an appeal filed under Section 30 of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 against the Judgment and Order dated 28.04.2017 in W.C. Case no. 46/2015 passed by the learned Commissioner, Employee’s Compensation, Cachar, Silchar.

¶23

The facts of the case in a nutshell is that the son of the claimants, Late Sabir Alam Laskar was employed by the owner of the vehicle bearing registration no. AS/08/6349 (Bolero) who was murdered by some unknown culprits in the course of his employment on 01.06.2015 at Narayancherra Division T.E. for reasons unknown to the claimants. The claimants claimed that the age of the deceased was 27 years at the time of the accident and the monthly salary of the deceased was Rs. 16,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand only). The deceased left his dependent mother Musstt. Minara Begum Laskar – age 48 years.

¶24

Accordingly, an FIR was lodged and the case was registered by Katigorah P.S. Case no. 226/2015 u/s 302/34, IPC. The opposite party no. 1 had submitted his written statement and admitted that the deceased was a driver of the vehicle bearing registration no. AS/08/6349 (Bolero) and possessed valid driving

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

license at the time of the accident. The opposite party Insurance Company Ltd. contested the claim and strongly denied that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 16,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand only) including daily allowance. After hearing both the parties by giving opportunity to both the parties to adduce their evidence, the learned Tribunal held that the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant by calculating the compensation amount as herein under :

¶27

The monthly salary was accepted as Rs. 12,000/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand only) since the claimants did not submit any salary certificate in support of her claim. The age of the deceased was stated as 27 years.

¶28

50% of the monthly salary x relevant factor of 27 years.

¶29

50% of Rs. 12,000/- X 213.57

¶30

= Rs. 6,000/- X 213.57

¶31

= Rs. 12,81,420/-

¶32

In addition to the said amount, the learned Tribunal held that the claimant is also entitled to get Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expenses.

¶33

The learned Tribunal thus, ordered the Insurance Company Ltd. to deposit an amount of Rs. 12,86,420/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Eighty Six Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty only) with the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation, Cachar, Silchar within a period of 30 days from the date of issue of the Judgment. On failure to deposit the awarded amount within the stipulated period of time as directed, the Insurance Company will be liable to pay interest @ 12% on the aforesaid amount from the date of the accident. Aggrieved by this order, the Insurance Company has filed the present appeal.

¶34

Page No.# 4/5

¶35

Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner had erred in law by accepting Rs. 12,000/- as monthly wages of the deceased wherein the Commissioner ought to have decided the case by taking the monthly wages of the deceased as Rs. 8,000/- per month as per the Central Government Notification dated 31.05.2010.

¶36

Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents in all fairness submits that he does not object to the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant by admitting that the monthly income of the deceased should be taken as Rs. 8,000/- per month as per the Central Government Notification dated 31.05.2010.

¶37

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court find it fit to interfere with the Judgment and Order of the learned Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation, Cachar, Silchar only to the extent of taking the income of the deceased, Sabir Alam Laskar as Rs. 8,000/instead of Rs. 12,000/- in terms of Central Government Notification dated 31.05.2010. Accordingly, the compensation liable to be paid by the Insurance Company is calculated herein :

¶38

Monthly salary = Rs. 8,000/-

¶39

Relevant Factor = 213.57 (Age – 27 years)

¶40

50% of the Monthly Salary X Relevant Factor

¶41

50% of Rs. 8,000/- X 213.57

Rs. 4,000/- X 213.57

Rs. 8,54,280/-

Page No.# 5/5

Funeral Expenses : Rs. 5,000/-

¶46

Total : Rs. 8,54,280/-

¶47

Rs. 5,000/-

¶48

= Rs. 8,59,280/-

¶49

Accordingly, the Insurance Company Ltd. is to deposit an amount of Rs. 8,59,218/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighteen only) with the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation, Cachar, Silchar within a period of 30 days from the date of issue of this Judgment along with interest @ 12% per annum on the aforesaid amount from the date of the accident, i.e. from 01.06.2015.

¶50

Thus, MFA No. 143/2017 stands allowed and disposed of.

¶51

JUDGE

¶52

Comparing Assistant

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Musstt Minara Begum Laskar and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Musstt Minara Begum Laskar and 2 Ors.

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

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Ashanta Saikia and 2 Ors.

Dr. Tulumoni Devi Vs Dr. Nirada Devi and 3 Ors.

Hanif Uddin Vs Suranjana Senapati , Acs

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Gouranga Devnath and 2 Ors.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Gouranga Devnath and 2 Ors.

Rofiqul Islam Sheikh Vs Suranjana Senapati, Acs