Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2993 (ALL)

SAKLA DEVI v. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

2007-12-13

RAJESH TANDON

body2007
( 2 ) BY the present A. O. filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, appellant has prayed for enhancement of the award dated 10. 8. 2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/district Judge, Tehri Garhwal in motor Accident Claim Petition No. 44 of 2001 Smt. Sakla Devi v. Bijendra singh and another, whereby the claimant/appellant has been awarded a sum of Rs. 1,78,000/- towards compensation. ( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated, a claim petition was filed by the claimant/appellant being Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 44 of 2001 Smt. Sakla Devi v. Bijendra singh and another claiming a sum of Rs. 3,20,000 towards compensation. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to the claimant, on 3. 2. 2001, when Km. Rajni (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was travelling in Commander Jeep No. U. P. 9-6126 (hereinafter referred to as the Jeep in question), due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Jeep in question, the jeep became disbalanced and fell down into 300 to 400 metres deep ditch. The deceased died on the spot. ( 5 ) OWNER of the jeep in question has contested the claim by filing a written statement stating therein that at the time of accident, the Jeep in question was comprehensively insured with the United India Insurance Company and the driver of the Jeep in question was holding valid driving licence. It has further been stated that at the time of accident, the driver of the Jeep in question was driving the jeep in a moderate speed, but due to some technical fault in the jeep the accident took place. ( 6 ) ON the pleadings of the parties, the claims tribunal has framed following issues.- (1) Whether the accident is took place on 3. 2. 2001 at about 4. 30 p. m. at piplidhar Motor Road with on P. S. Kirtinagar. Due to rash and negligent driving of Commander Jeep No. U. P. 8/6126 by its driver resulting the death of Km. Rajni ? (2) To what amount of compensation is the petitioner entitled and from which of the opp. parties. (3) Relief ? (4) Whether the vehicle was over-loaded ? If so, its effect ? ( 7 ) ON behalf of the claimant, Smt. Sakla Devi has been examined as P. W. 1. Rajni ? (2) To what amount of compensation is the petitioner entitled and from which of the opp. parties. (3) Relief ? (4) Whether the vehicle was over-loaded ? If so, its effect ? ( 7 ) ON behalf of the claimant, Smt. Sakla Devi has been examined as P. W. 1. Towards the documentary evidence, claimant has filed Photostat copy of the post-Mortem Report Paper No. 15 Ga/4, copy of the charge-sheet Paper No. 41 ga/3, copy of the First Information Report Paper No. 41 Ga/9 and some other documents. ( 8 ) WHILE deciding the issue No. 1 as to whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Commander Jeep No. U. P. 8/6126 on 3. 2. 2001 at about 4. 30 at Piplidhar Motor Road, P. S. Kirtinagar in which Km. Rajni died, claims tribunal has relied upon the statement of p. W. I, copy of the first information report Paper No. 41 Ga/9, copy of the charge-sheet Paper No. 41 Ga/3, which show that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Jeep in question. Relying upon the aforesaid documents, the claims tribunal has recorded a finding that at the time of accident, the driver of the jeep in question was driving the jeep rashly and negligently due to which the accident took place resulting the death of km. Rajni. This issue has been decided in favour of the claimant. ( 9 ) I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the said finding and the same deserves to be confirmed. ( 10 ) WHILE deciding the Issues No. 2 and 3 with regard to quantum of compensation and other relief, the claims tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 15,000/- per annum and has deducted a sum of Rs. 1/3rd of the personal expenses, then the amount of dependency has been worked out to rs. 10,000/- per annum. Further the claims tribunal taking the age of the parents of the deceased into consideration has selected multiplier of 14. After multiplying the annual dependency with 14, the amount of compensation comes to rs. 1,40,000/ -. Besides this, the claims tribunal has also awarded a sum of rs. 5,000/- towards physical and mental agony, and further sum of Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expenses. After multiplying the annual dependency with 14, the amount of compensation comes to rs. 1,40,000/ -. Besides this, the claims tribunal has also awarded a sum of rs. 5,000/- towards physical and mental agony, and further sum of Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expenses. Thus, the claims tribunal has awarded a total sum of rs. 1,50,000/- towards compensation along with interest @ 4% per annum. ( 11 ) WHILE deciding the Issue No. 4, the claims tribunal has recorded that since the Insurer has failed to produce any evidence that there was over loading in the Jeep in question, therefore, the liability to pay the compensation will be of the insurance company. ( 12 ) I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the award passed by the claims tribunal concerned. ( 13 ) COUNSEL for the appellant has submitted that the interest awarded is on the lower side and the same be increased. ( 14 ) IN Managing Director, T. N. S. T. C. v. Sripriya and others, 2007 67 ALR (SC) 813, the Apex Court has observed as under.-"10. In regard to choice of the multiplicand the Halsburys Laws of england in Vol. 34, para 98 states the principle thus.-"98. Assessment of Damages under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1976.-The courts have evolved a method for calculating the amount of pecuniary benefit that dependants could reasonably expect to have received from the deceased in the future. First the annual value to the dependants of those benefits (the multiplicand) is assessed. In the ordinary case of the death of a wage-earner that figure is arrived at by deducting from the wages the estimated amount of his own personal and living expenses. The assessment is split into two parts. The first part comprises damages for the period between death and trial. The multiplicand is multiplied by the number of years which have elapsed between those two dates. Interest at one-half the short-term investment rate is also awarded on that multiplicand. The second part is damages for the period from the trial onwards. For that period, the number of years which have based on the number of years that the expectancy would probably have lasted; central to that calculation is the probable length of the deceaseds working life at the date of death. " ( 15 ) CONSIDERING the age of the deceased appropriate multiplier would be 12. For that period, the number of years which have based on the number of years that the expectancy would probably have lasted; central to that calculation is the probable length of the deceaseds working life at the date of death. " ( 15 ) CONSIDERING the age of the deceased appropriate multiplier would be 12. The income fixed by the Tribunal and the deduction for personal expenses do not warrant any interference. Worked out on that basis, the entitlement of the loss of income is Rs. 5,76,000. The other expenses awarded unaltered. In other words, total entitlement of the claimant is fixed at Rs. 6,00,000. It would be appropriate to fix the rate of interest at 7. 5% instead of 9% as done by the Tribunal and maintained by the High Court. " 15. In view of the aforesaid judgment, so far as interest part is concerned, I am of the view that the interest shall be payable @ 7. 5% per annum in place of 4% per annum. ( 16 ) WITH the aforesaid modification in the rate of interest, A. O. is dismissed. No order as to costs. Appeal Dismissed. .