Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 652 (MP)

Ashok v. Tabrej

2007-06-27

J.K.MAHESHWARI, S.K.KULSHRESTHA

body2007
ORDER Kulshrestha. J. -- 1. This appeal shall also govern the disposal of MA No. 62512007 filed by the National Insurance Company Limited against the same award dated 18.12.2006 passed by the and Additional MACT, Mhow in Claim Case No. 51/2006. 2. The appellant Ashok had filed an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to seek compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- for the death of his wife Preeti in an accident in which he was also hurt and for which he had made a separate claim. 3. According to the case set-up by the claimant Ashok, while on 11.10.2003 he was proceeding on his Motorcycle bearing Registration No. MP09-JH-4445 with his wife Preeti and son Kunal on the pillion, near Fa1bagh within the jurisdiction of P.S. Rajendra Nagar a Truck bearing Registration No. MP09-K/6275 belonging to NA No.2 Bablu Khan and insured with NA No.3 National Insurance Company Limited, approached from the opposite direction at an alarming speed and on account of the rash and negligent driving of the said Truck by respondent No.1, the Truck collided with the Motorcycle with the result the appellant, his wife and his son Kunal fell down and the Truck ran over his wife and son who died instantaneously. The appellant also received injuries and permanent disability. It was stated that the deceased Preeti was employed in a Private Factory at Pithampur and was in receipt of salary of Rs. 4,000/- per month and on that basis the claim of Rs. 10,00,000/- as compensation for her death in a motor accident was made. The Tribunal, however, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,11,900/- and, therefore, MA No. 1529/2007 has been filed. 4. The respondent No.3 National Insurance Company has also filed MA No. 625/2007 pointing out that the claimant Ashok had forged documents to show that his wife was employed and was in receipt of Rs. 4,000/- per month as salary while the fact was that the Company in which it was stated that she was employed, had closed down in the year 2002. 4,000/- per month as salary while the fact was that the Company in which it was stated that she was employed, had closed down in the year 2002. On the basis of the above concocted story and the forgery of the documents, the learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company submits that not only that the award passed in regard to the death of Preeti, his wife, is vitiated, he has also rendered himself liable to be proceeded against under the provisions of section 340 CrPC for the offences committed by him for eradication of the tendency of perjury. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Insofar as the contention of the Insurance Company in MA No. 625/2007 is concerned, we are of the view that it is not on the basis of the claim that the deceased was employed in the said Company and was in receipt of the said sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month that the income of the deceased has been assessed at Rs. 2,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that in the case of Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others [2001 (3) ACJ 1735] the Supreme Court has ruled that even contribution of the wife in the house hold work can be monetarily assessed and awarded compensation on the basis that the said contribution could be quantified in the sum of Rs. 3,000/- a month. In the case in hand, the income/contribution of the deceased has been quantified at Rs. 2,100/per month and deducing 1/3rd therefrom, the dependency has been assessed as Rs. 1,400/- per mensum. The said dependency thus comes to Rs. 16,800/per annum. In view of the age of the deceased, a multiplier of 18 has been selected and the total dependency has been assessed in the sum of Rs. 3,02,400/-. To the said amount the Tribunal has added Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/towards loss of estate. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the amount of Rs. 3,11,900/- awarded as compensation for the death of the wife of the claimant is excessive. 7. 3,02,400/-. To the said amount the Tribunal has added Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/towards loss of estate. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the amount of Rs. 3,11,900/- awarded as compensation for the death of the wife of the claimant is excessive. 7. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, appellant in MA No. 625/2007, submits that an application under section 340 of the CrPC had been submitted before the Tribunal to prosecute the claimant Ashok for having forged documents with regard to the income of his wife with a view to procure advantage. Learned counsel has invited attention to paragraph 21 of the award in which (A WI) Jitendra has categorically admitted that the electric connection provided to the said factory had been discontinued three years ago and it was only the claimant who had given him information that Preeti was working in the said Company. He has also produced documents to show that the business and the business activities of the said Company had already come to an end. On this basis, the contention of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company is that since forged documents were used in evidence and commission of an offence under the provisions of section 193 of the IPC was patent, the Court ought to have directed prosecution of the claimant Ashok. The learned counsel, however, does not dispute that no finding was given by the Tribunal to the effect that the documents used were forged. Section 340 (1) (a) of the CrPC provides that in such cases a finding to the effect that the documents were forged should be recorded and though the Tribunal has not believed the evidence with regard to the appointment of deceased Preeti in the said Factory, no finding to the effect that the documents were forged and used in judicial proceeding has been recorded. Under these circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal that it was not a case where proceedings would be initiated under section 340 of the CrPC. 8. Under these circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal that it was not a case where proceedings would be initiated under section 340 of the CrPC. 8. In view of the fact that adequate compensation has been awarded by the Tribunal in relation to the death of Preeti, wife of claimant Ashok, and the Tribunal has not committed any error in declining to prosecute the claimant in accordance with the provisions of section 340 of the CrPC, we find no substance in both the above appeals. 9. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed but with no order as to costs.