Allowed

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Through Dipankar Roy Manager Legal v. Amrit Jain And Ors.

Jharkhand HC1 Nov 2022MA/192/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Insurance Company's appeal, upholding its calculation of death compensation by deducting tax from established income as per Supreme Court precedent. The court reduced the awarded sum from approximately Rs.83.69 lakh to Rs.65.96 lakh and rejected the claimants' argument for a 9% interest rate, maintaining the 6% rate. Parties also settled the quantum.

What did the court decide?

Accompagned by interest @ 6% per annum, the Insurance Company was directed to pay Rs.65,95,926/- to claimants in equal shares after deducting amounts already paid.

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Miscellaneous Appeal No. 192 of 2016

¶3

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., having registered office at ICICI Bank Towewr, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, having Corporate Office at Zenith House Keshav Rao Khade Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai, through Dipankar Roy, Manager (Legal), having Reference No.1002606, working at Branch Office, Opposite Tirath Mansion, Near Over Bridge, Main Road, Doranda, Ranchi …. O.P. No.4/Appellant/Insurance Co.

-V E R S U S –

1. Amrit Jain

2. Varsha Jain

3. Gourav Jain

4. Sourabh Jain

5. Amara Ram

6. Anup Singh @ Kalu

7. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company, Branch Office at Ground Floor, PRM Tower, Plot No.947 on 10^th D Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, Rajasthan

¶12

… Applicants/Opposite Parties/Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S. N. PATHAK

¶14

For the Appellant/Insurance : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate. For the Resps./Claimant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate -----

¶15

11/01.11.2022 This appeal arises out of Award dated 28.01.2016, passed by learned District Judge-I-cum-M.A.C.T., Bokaro in T.M.V No.46 of 2009, whereby and whereunder the claim application filed by the claimants/applicants has been allowed and a sum of Rs.83,69,175/- was awarded in favour of claimants along with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the application till actual payment.

¶16

Bereft of unnecessary details, the parties have agreed on the quantum of amount as produced before this Court.

¶17

At the very outset, Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, by producing a chart showing calculation of compensation amount, which has been taken on record. The calculation and

¶18

¶19

the amount for which the claimants are entitled for as shown in the calculation chart is not disputed by other side. He places heavy reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and submits that the calculation/amount shown by the learned Tribunal is not as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and as such, he has furnished the chart, showing that established income means the income minus the tax component. He further submits that the learned Tribunal relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Munna Lal Jain & Ors. Vs. Bipin Kumar Sharma as decided in Civil Appeal No.4497/2015 , but the same is not applicable in this case. He further submits that as per Chart, the total amount comes to Rs.37,23,887/- in place of Rs.48,99,375/(As awarded by learned Tribunal) in relation to death of late Suman Devi Jain and Rs.28,72,046/- in place of Rs.34,69,800/- (As awarded by learned Tribunal) in relation of death of late Rajendra Kumar Jain and as such, total compensation would be Rs.65,95,993/- .

¶20

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants very fairly submits that some apparent error has been made by the learned Tribunal, as the learned Tribunal has wrongly calculated the established income of the deceased and come to finding that claimants are entitled for Rs.83,69,175/- contrary to ratio decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Pranay Sethi (supra). He further submits that the learned Tribunal has calculated annual income of the deceased without deducting the tax and as such, the chart produced by the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company has to be accepted and there is no illegality or infirmity in the chart. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that he is not disputing the calculation chart, but the learned Tribunal has awarded only 6 % interest on the compensation amount from the date of filing of the application till actual payment, which ought to have been enhanced to 9 % per annum.

¶21

The parties have agreed that some error has been made by the learned Tribunal regarding calculation of compensation amount/established income of the deceased and learned counsel for the respondent-claimants also accepts the said calculation chart, produced by the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, details of which are as follows:-

¶22

¶23

Name Suman Devi

¶24

Income as per ITR minus(-) tax = Established Income

¶25

Rs.2,77,130/- (-) Tax Rs.17,298/- = Rs.2,59,832/-

¶26

Age-40 years

¶27

Multiplier-15

¶28

Income	:-		Rs.2,59,832/-
¼ Deduction	:-	(-)	Rs.64,958/-
	=		Rs.1,94,874/-
25% Future Prospects	:-	(+)	Rs.48,718/-
	=		Rs.2,43,592/-
Multiplier (X)		(x)	15
			Rs.36,53,880/-
Conventional Head	=	(+)	Rs.70,000/-
Total	=		Rs.37,23,880/-

¶29

2. Name- Rajendra Kumar Jain

¶30

Income as per ITR minus(i) Tax = Established Income Rs.2,55,970/- (-) Tax Rs.26,058/- = Rs.2,29,912/-

¶31

Age-48 years

¶32

Multiplier-13

¶33

Income	:-		Rs.2,29,912/-
¼ Deduction	:-	(-)	Rs.57,478/-
	=		Rs.1,72,434/-
25% Future Prospects	:-	(+)	Rs.43,108/-
	=		Rs.2,15,542/-
Multiplier		(x)	13
			Rs.28,02,046/-
Conventional Head	=	(+)	Rs.70,000/-
Total	=		Rs.28,72,046/-

¶34

The amount, which have been calculated with respect to the claimants as Rs.65,95,926/- (37,23,880 +28,72,046). This Court is in full agreement with the calculation done by the Insurance Company, which has also not been disputed by the learned counsel for the claimants. So far as the interest part is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere on the same.

¶35

¶36

In view of the foregoing discussion, the claimants are entitled for only Rs.65,95,926/- along with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of claim application till its actual payment. Accordingly, appellant/Insurance Company/ O.P. No.4 is directed to calculate the compensation amount along with 6 % interest forthwith and make payment of the total compensation to the claimants in equal shares in terms and conditions of the order of the learned Tribunal, after deducting/adjusting the amount already paid to claimants, within a period of six weeks’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37