Allowed

Chinta Devi and Anr. v. Rakesh Kumar Naik and Ors.

Jharkhand HC4 Jul 2022MA/426/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this motor accident compensation appeal, the High Court evaluated evidence regarding the deceased's income, overriding the Tribunal's assessment based on oral testimony. The Court recalculated compensation considering the correct income, age multiplier, and statutory future prospects enhancement, granting additional relief with interest.

What did the court decide?

Insurance Company directed to pay additional sum of Rs.5,28,000/- with interest at 7.5% via two equal cheques to claimants.

Chinta Devi and Anr. Vs Rakesh Kumar Naik and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

M.A No. 426 of 2015

¶3

¶4

Chinta Devi

¶5

Bimala Devi …. …. Appellant(s).

¶6

Versus

¶7

Rakesh Kumar Naik

¶8

Parmeshwari Rai

¶9

Kartik Munda

¶10

Ashok Kumar Rai

¶11

The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

¶12

The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.…. …. Respondent(s)

¶13

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

¶14

For the Appellant(S) : Mr. Arvind Kumar Lal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate Mr. D.C. Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate

¶15

07/04.07.2022

¶16

Heard the parties.

¶17

This appeal has been filed by the claimants claiming enhancement of compensation which has been awarded by the District Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Court No.1 Giridih in Title (M.V) Suit No. 10 of 2002.

¶18

Counsel for the appellants has taken only one ground in support of this appeal which is in respect of the income of the deceased. He submits that as per the evidence, the deceased was not unemployed and was a cloth seller who was earning Rs.5000/- per month. Considering the oral evidence about the income of the deceased, and the fact that he was not unemployed, the Tribunal could not have assessed the income of the deceased, for the purpose of calculating compensation, as Rs.3000/- per month.

¶19

Counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance Company argues that there is no document on record to suggest that the deceased was a cloth seller, that being so that Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3000/- per month.

¶20

Considering the limited issue in this appeal, I have gone through the evidence on record. C.W. No.1 is Bimala Devi who is the wife of the deceased. She in Paragraph no.3 of her Examination –in- Chief has stated that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month by selling clothes. C.W.2 also narrated that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month. Mother of the deceased was also examined as a witness (wrongly the number was given as C.W.1).

¶21

-2-

¶22

She also stated that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month. The other witness i.e Lato Nayak also stated that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month. Thus, from the evidence led by the claimants the fact that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month and was clothes seller is established. In crossexamination nothing contrary could be extracted from them. Thus, this Court held that the income of the deceased is Rs. 5000/- per month. A fact cannot be lost sight of that in this country. Small time cloth seller and other business man who infact are hawkers, do not maintain any record of their business. It is also not expected from them to maintain a ledger or balance-sheet.

¶23

Further, I find that deceased was aged about 24 years which is apparent from the post-mortem report, thus the application of multiplier would be 18. The claimants are also entitled for enhancement of 40% on account of Future Prospects and Rs.70,000/- under conventional head in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vrs. Pranay Sethi & Ors . reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680.

¶24

Now the compensation needs to be recalculated which would be as under:Rs.5000/- X 12 X 18(multiplier)=Rs.10,80,000/Rs.10,80,000/- -1/3rd (Dependency)= Rs.7,20,000/Rs.7,20,000/-+40% (Future Prospects) =Rs.10,08,000/Rs.10,08,000/- +Rs.70,000/- =Rs. 10,78,000/-

¶25

The Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.5,50,000/-. Thus, the difference amount is Rs.5,28,000/-. This difference amount will carry interest @ 7.5% from the date of award i.e 20.6.2015 till the same is paid. Insurance Company is directed to pay the said amount by drawing two cheques of equal amount and hand over the same to each of the claimants.

¶26

Accordingly, the instant appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.

¶27

(ANANDA SEN , J)

¶28

anjali/cp2

Chinta Devi and Anr. v. Rakesh Kumar Naik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinta Devi and Anr. v. Rakesh Kumar Naik and Ors.

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

Gopal Paul Murtiwala And Anr. Vs Sheo Kumar Arora

Ahmad Mian and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner and Ors.

Nimai Ghosh Vs Anil Singh

M Ferasat Hussain Vs Hardyal Singh And Anr.

National Insurance Company Limited Through Assistant Manager Jharkhand Legal Cell Vs Rameshwar Lohra And Ors.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Represented Thr The Authorized Officer Mr Kapil Kispotta Vs Johara Khatoon And Ors.