Allowed

Sanjib Banik v. Tinku Ghosh

Tripura HC29 Jun 2017MAC App./70/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Motor Accident Claims appeal, the High Court modified the injury tribunal's compensation award. The court found the imputed income of Rs. 200/day for a mason to be unrealistic and held Rs. 300/day. The total compensation was fixed at Rs. 44,500 with 8% interest, directed to be deposited by the insurer.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award was modified; total compensation fixed at Rs. 44,500 with 8% interest, directed to be deposited by the insurer within two months.

Sanjib Banik Vs Tinku Ghosh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Tripura HC (2017)

¶1

MAC App No. 70/2015

¶2

B E F O R E HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. T. VAIPHEI

¶3

Present:

¶4

For the appellant : Ms. S. Deb Gupta, Adv. For the respondents : Mr. A. Nandi, Adv.

¶5

29.06.2017.

¶6

Heard Ms. S. Deb Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. A. Nandi, the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶7

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14.05.2015 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala, Court No.4 in T.S (MAC) No.443 of 2013 awarding a sum of ₹37,000/- with interest @ 8% from the date of claim petition to the appellant.

¶8

The facts giving rise to that appeal are that on 08.08.2012 when the appellant along with other passengers were proceeding from Guwahati to Agartala boarding the vehicle bearing registration No.AS-01-Y-7379(Bus) at about 5 AM, the vehicle went off the road through the sharp turning at Tengseng village along National High Way No. 44, Meghalaya and fell into deep canal. The appellant suffered injuries on different parts of his bodies as a result of the accident and was admitted Silchar Medical College and Hospital and underwent treatment as an indoor patient from 08.08.2012 to 12.08.2012 and thereafter he discharged from the Hospital. According to the appellant he was treated by various doctors at Agartala and thereafter on 10.10.2012 went outside the State and was treated at Kolkata for better treatment at Medical Super Specialty Hospital, Mukundapur, Kolkata and he again visited the Medica Institute of Orthopedic Science, Mukundapur, Kolkata on 01.01.2013. According to the appellant he became

¶9

MAC App No. 70/2015 Page 1 of 3

¶10

disabled due to the injuries. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle. The appellant claimed that he was a mason by profession and used to earn ₹15,000/- per month and was aged about 50 years at the time of the accident. He claimed ₹43,40,000/- as compensation.

¶11

The claim petition was contested by both the owner of the vehicle and the insurance company, the National Insurance Co. Ltd. At the conclusion of the trial, the Tribunal passed the impugned award.

¶12

Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties, the controversy has now boiled down to the question as to whether the income assessed by the Tribunal @ ₹ 200/- per day for a mason like appellant is sustainable in law or not? It may be recorded that the accident had taken place in 2012. But considering the ground realities it will be somewhat unrealistic to believe that the appellant was earned ₹200/- per day which is indisputable for a mason by profession. Considering the cost of living prevailing at that time, I am of the view that the assessment of the income ₹300/- per day will be more realistic in view of the ground realities.

¶13

In this view of the matter, I hold that the appellant was earning ₹300/- per day and after deducting 5(five) days of holidays he must have earn ₹7,500/- per month. That being the position, the appellant will be entitled to ₹7,500/- X 3 = ₹22,500/- towards loss of income for three months. No other issue is survived for consideration. Therefore, the total compensation payable to the appellant is ₹44,500/- which will carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of claim petition. The insurer i.e. the National Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed to deposit the aforesaid amount with the accrued interest to this Registry within a period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this order. Any amount already

¶14

MAC App No. 70/2015 Page 2 of 3

¶15

deposited or paid to the claimant-appellant shall stand adjusted accordingly.

¶16

It is made clear that as and when the aforesaid amount is deposited, the same shall be released to the appellant as per usual arrangements without further reference to this Court. The impugned judgment and award dated 14.05.2015 stands modified in the manner and to the extent indicated above. Transmit the L.C. records to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶17

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶18

d.dey.

¶19

MAC App No. 70/2015 Page 3 of 3

Sanjib Banik v. Tinku Ghosh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjib Banik v. Tinku Ghosh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Ch. Nag Vs Mridul Ch. Nag

Samir Shib Vs The State Of Tripura

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Rina Sarkar and Ors.

The Tradco Vs The State Of Tripura

Md. Bahar Miah Vs the State of Tripura

Rosana Begam Vs the State of Tripura