Allowed

Krishna Devi v. Lakhan Lal Daluka And Anr.

Jharkhand HC20 Sept 2019MA/608/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge admitted the appellant's application for condonation of delay and allowed the appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded in a motor vehicle accident case. The court modified the award to include future prospects as per National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi.

What did the court decide?

The award was modified to Rs. 5,59,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing.

Krishna Devi Vs Lakhan Lal Daluka And Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)

¶3

…...

¶4

M.A. No. 608 of 2017

¶5

¶6

Krishna Devi, W/o Late Arun Prasad Gairola, Resident of C/o Ram Naresh Prasad, 82B Block, Upper Sonari Near DAV School, P.O. & P.S.- Sonari, District- East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur …… Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Lakhan Lal Daluka, S/o K.L. Daluka, Resident of Old Sonari Basti, P.O. & P.S.Sonari, District- East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur.

¶9

The New India Assurance Company Limited, Divisional Office at Kamani Centre, Bistupur Main Road, P.O. & P.S.- Bistupur, District- East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur

¶10

……Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶12

For the Appellant : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Advocate For the Respondent no.1 : Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, Advocate For the Respondent no.2 : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate

¶13

07/Dated: 20/09/2019. I.A. No.8464 of 2017

¶14

The aforesaid application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 27 days in preferring the appeal for enhancement of the award dated 22.06.2017 passed in Compensation Case No.163 of 2016, passed by learned District Judge-III-Cum-Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that sole child of the claimant/appellant has died in motor vehicle accident and after getting certified copy of the judgment/award, the appellant approached her Advocate in Ranchi on 11.10.2017. As she is a female and has difficulties in pursuing the appeal in the Hon'ble High Court, as such, delay may be condoned.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2- The New India Assurance Company Limited, Mr. Alok Lal has vehemently opposed the same.

¶17

Heard, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no.2- The New India Assurance Company Limited and on being satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the I.A., the delay of 27 days in preferring the appeal for enhancement of the award is hereby condoned.

¶18

The aforesaid I.A. stands disposed of.

¶19

M.A. No. 608 of 2017

¶20

On the joint consent of the parties, the instant appeal is taken for final hearing.

¶21

-2-

¶22

Heard, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no.2- The New India Assurance Company Limited.

¶23

The appellant/claimant being mother of the deceased has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award dated 22.06.2017 passed in Compensation Case No.163 of 2016, passed by learned District Judge-III-Cum-Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that her sole son (deceasedVivek Gairola) who was pillion rider of the motor cycle bearing registration no.JH05AQ-5207 was hit by a truck bearing registration no.BHK-7516 being driven by the driver in high speed rashly and negligently which dashed the motorcycle. Deceased-Vivek Gairola was admitted to TMH Hospital for treatment and died during the treatment. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that truck bearing registration no. BHK-7516 was insured with the New India Assurance Company Limited vide policy no.54020531120200006877 for the period running from 03.11.2013 to 02.11.2014 though the accident took place on 06.06.2013 at around 16:15 hours which was within the period of Insurance of the offending vehicle. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the deceased died at the age of 19 years but the learned Tribunal has not granted compensation to the deceased in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another, reported in ( 2009) 6 SCC 121. The Tribunal has not considered the future prospect of the deceased as per the judgment in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in ( 2017) 16 SCC 680, Supreme Court has fixed Rs.70,000/under the conventional heads i.e. Rs.40,000/- as loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- as funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- as loss of Estate and the learned Tribunal has only paid of Rs.40,000/-, as such Rs.30,000/- amount may also be given to the appellant/claimant.

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that 40% of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal may be enhanced as Future Prospect,

¶26

-3-

¶27

in view of the decision of Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, Rs.1,51,200/- may be added apart from balance amount of Rs.30,000/- under the conventional head, as such, instead of awarded amount of Rs.4,18,000/-, the claimant is entitled to the sum of Rs.5,59,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application in view of Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶28

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2- The New India Assurance Company Limited has opposed the enhancement of the Award and has submitted that the appellant/applicant being the mother of the deceased has been rightly paid and accident claim award cannot be considered as bonanza and windfall, as such, no interference is required by this Court.

¶29

Heard, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no.2- The New India Assurance Company Limited and perused the materials brought on record. It appears that 40% of the Future Prospect in view of the judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra) has not been taken note of by the learned Tribunal. Apart from that under the conventional head of Rs.70,000/- only Rs.40,000/- has been granted to the claimant, as such, appellant/claimant is entitled for further Rs.30,000/- under the Conventional head.

¶30

Accordingly, this Court modifies the award of Rs.3,78,000/- passed by the learned Tribunal by enhancing with 40% Future Prospect as Rs.1,51,200/- which comes to tune of Rs.5,29,200/- with further Rs.30,000/- as conventional head which has less been granted by the learned Tribunal.

¶31

Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled for Rs.5,59,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application before the learned Tribunal.

¶32

Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed.

¶33

The award is accordingly modified to the aforesaid extent.

¶34

( Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶35

sandeep/R.S-

Krishna Devi v. Lakhan Lal Daluka And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Devi v. Lakhan Lal Daluka And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Thr Its Branch Manager Purnendu Chatterjee Vs Sharda Devi and Ors.

Divisional Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Jolen Sanga

The New India Assurance Company Limited Reprr Thr Its Divisional Office No 1 Vs Joginder Singh Jassal

Jitendra Kumar Pandey Vs Ravi Kumar Vishwakarma And Ors.

Neeraj Kumar Talreja Vs Smt Vidhyanti Devi And Ors.

National Insurance Company Limited Represented through Its Assistant Manager Vs Pramila Prasad