Dismissed

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kundan Singh

Uttarakhand HC9 Nov 2021AO/130/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed an appeal by the insurance company seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the deceased's dependents. The court upheld the tribunal's award of Rs. 39,31,500, rejecting the contention that perquisites should be excluded from the deceased's income calculation.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed on merit; no order as to costs.

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kundan Singh — Insurance | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

AO No. 130 of 2018

¶3

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd.

¶4

.....….......Appellant

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Kundan Singh and others ……...Respondents

¶7

Date of hearing and Judgement : 09.11.2021

¶8

Advocates appeared in the case:-

¶9

For Appellant : Mr. Pulak Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant

¶10

Versus

¶11

For Respondents : Mr. Neeraj Upreti, learned counsel for the respondent no.1, 2 & 3. Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 & 6.

¶12

Sri S.K.Mishra, J.

¶13

1. Heard Mr. Pulak Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Neeraj Upreti, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1,2 & 3 and Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 & 6.

¶14

2. The service of notice against the respondent no. 5 is not sufficient but we take up the appeal on the consideration that even if the appeal is allowed, his interest shall not be affected.

¶15

3. The appeal is against the order dated 11.01.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal in

¶16

¶17

MACP No. 42 of 2012, Kundan Singh and others vs. Subhash Chandra Sharma and others, awarding Rs. 39,31,500/- as compensation.

¶18

4. The claimants are respectively father, mother and brother of the deceased Mahendra Singh. Mahendra Singh died in a motor accident on 28.04.2012 involving the offending truck bearing no. UP-17C5721 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner.

¶19

5. The facts of the accident case is not disputed; firstly the death of Mahendra Singh is not disputed; secondly, late Mahendra Singh was 26 years old and was earning an amount of Rs. 30,000/-(salary, incentive and perquisites), which is also not disputed. The only contention is that the deceased’s basic income should only be calculated while calculating the compensation and the perquisites and incentive should be excluded. It is also not disputed that the petitioner was a holder of degree of Master of Business Administration and was working as a Marketing Executive in a private company. Prospect of his earning more and getting promotions was very large and in my opinion the amount of compensation granted are less and it should have been higher. So, we do not find any reason to come to a conclusion that the amount of compensation awarded is higher and it should be reduced.

¶20

6. We find no merit in this appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed on merit.

¶21

¶22

7. There shall be no order as to the costs.

¶23

8. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶24

(S.K.Mishra)

¶25

Judge

¶26

KKS

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kundan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kundan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Insurance Company Vs Hari Singh Rawat

Smt. Ritu Singh Vs Smt. Premlata Singh

Vice Chancellor, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Vs Presiding Officer Labour Court Kashipur, District-Udham Singh Nagar

Aizaj Ahmed Vs the State Transport Appellate Tribunal

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Basanti Devi Joshi

Poonam Kashyap Vs M/S H D B Finance Services Ltd.