Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1045 (CAL)

Samhita Kabasi v. Swapan Das

2008-12-05

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA

body2008
JUDGMENT:- (1). Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Rudrendra Nath Banerjee, JJ. Instead of hearing the application, we propose to hear out the appeal itself by treating it as on days list. (2). This appeal is at the instance of claimants in a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and is directed against award dated 31st August, 2001 passed by the Second Court of Additional District Judge, Alipore, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 24-Parganas (South), in M.A.C. Case No. 144 of 1999 thereby disposing off the application by awarding a sum of Rs. 4,95,200/-as compensation, out of which Rs. 50,000/- had already been received by the claimants in an earlier proceeding under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. (3). Being dissatisfied, the claimants have come with the present appeal. (4). The facts that the victim died in the accident and that the offending vehicle was insured with the New India Assurance Company Limited are not in dispute. The negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle has also been established. It appears from record that the victim was an employee of the Calcutta Soft Drink Pvt. Ltd. and from the pay slip for the last one year it is indicated that the gross salary paid by the employee was Rs. 67,598/-. (5). It appears from the award impugned that the Tribunal has proceeded as if the victim had annual income of Rs. 48,570/-and thereafter, by applying multiplier of 15, had arrived at the figure of Rs. 4,95,200/-. (6). Mr. Roy, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants, by relying upon a certificate issued on behalf of the employee, tried to convince us that the total annual salary of the victim was Rs. 94,000/-and odd and therefore, the Tribunal below should have proceeded to assess the amount of compensation on that basis and not on the basis of Rs. 48,570/-. (7). Mr. Das, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company has, however, opposed the aforesaid contention of Mr. Roy and has contended that the certificate issued by the employer should be ignored in view of the fact that the pay-slip for the last 12 months prior to accident was exhibited on behalf of the employer and after adding up the gross income for such 12 months, the amount comes to Rs. 67,598/-. According to Mr. Das, therefore, the figure of Rs. 67,598/-. According to Mr. Das, therefore, the figure of Rs. 94,000/-and odd was an absurd one and there is no scope of assessing the compensation on that basis. Mr. Das further contends that we should assess the compensation on the basis of Rs. 67,598/-after deducting the Income-tax payable on that amount, Professional Tax, E.S.I. deduction, those being all compulsory. (8). Mr. Das has placed before us the total amount of Income-tax payable for the relevant year 1997-98 indicating that on the basis of gross income of Rs. 67.000/-, the amount of tax payable is Rs. 5,100/-. Apart from the deduction of Income-tax, it appears that about Rs. 600/- were deducted towards E.S.I. and Rs. 400/-towards professional income. Therefore, a total sum of Rs. 7,000/- should be deducted from Rs. 67,000/-and the amount comes to Rs. 60,000/-. (9). If we deduct one-third from the said amount to the personal expenditure of the victim, in such a case, the family had been losing a sum of Rs. 40,000/- per annum for the untimely death of the victim. (10). It appears from record that the Tribunal has awarded about Rs. 5 lacs as compensation and if the said amount if invested in any Nationalised Bank, at the rate of 8% per annum, the annual interest payable will be about Rs. 40,000/-. We therefore, find that ultimate conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal was in accordance with the principles laid down by Supreme Court for the purpose of assessing the amount of compensation through the process of multiplier. (11). We however, find that Mr. Roy is quite justified in contending that the Tribunal should have awarded interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the awarded sum. (12). We, therefore, modify the award impugned by adding interest on the awarded sum of Rs. 4,95,200/- at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the application (19th April, 1999) till actual deposit of the amount. It is needless to mention that running of interest will stop from the date of deposit of the amount by the Insurance Company. (13). The award impugned, is thus, modified to the extent indicated above. (14). It is needless to mention that running of interest will stop from the date of deposit of the amount by the Insurance Company. (13). The award impugned, is thus, modified to the extent indicated above. (14). The Insurance Company is directed to pay the balance enhanced amount within one month from today by depositing the same before the Tribunal and the amount be paid by two separate cheques of equal amount in the names of the two appellants. (15). In view of disposal of the appeal itself, the connected application for expeditious hearing of the appeal being CAN 4937 of 2008 has become infructuous and the same is disposed off accordingly. Let the lower Court records be sent down immediately. Xerox certified copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties within a week from the date of making of such application on compliance with requisite formalities.