Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1036 (JHR)

Punam Devi v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

2009-07-27

JAYA ROY, M.Y.EQBAL

body2009
JUDGMENT: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. This appeal by the claimants who are the widow, widowed mother and two minor children has been filed for enhancement of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dumka in Title Claim Suit No. 38 of 1999. The facts which are not in dispute are that the deceased, aged about 35 years, was in the employment of Rahul Tent House. While he was traveling with the goods of Rahul Tent House in a vehicle it met with an accident causing death of the deceased. The claimants claimed the compensation of Rs. 6,50,000/-. The respondent-Insurance Company contested the case by filing Written Statement stating, inter alia, that the deceased himself was negligent while traveling in the said vehicle and because of his negligence, he fell down and succumbed to the injuries. According to the claimants-appellants the deceased was employed in the said Rahul Tent House and was getting a salary of Rs. 3500/-per month. Evidence to that effect was led by the claimants by examining witnesses and also by filing documentary evidence issued by the employer, Rahul Tent House, certifying the monthly salary which was paid to the deceased. However, the Tribunal disbelieved the evidence on the issue of income of the deceased and came to the conclusion that the net amount of compensation assessable is Rs. 3,40,000/-. Out of the aforesaid amount 50 % was deducted on account of the contributory negligence and finally the Tribunal hold that the compensation payable to the claimants would be Rs. 1,70,000/- Prima facie, we are of the view that the procedure adopted by the Tribunal in assessing the compensation is unknown to law. -2In Paragraph 15 of the impugned judgment the Tribunal held that considering the evidence, both oral and documentary, the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 2500/-per month. Then in spite of the aforesaid finding, in paragraph 16 the Tribunal appears to have taken help of 2nd Schedule of the Act holding the income as Rs. 100/-per day for 25 days only in a month. In the later part, the Tribunal took the annual income of the deceased as Rs. 30,000/-and multiplied it by 17 by which the compensation amount assessed to Rs. 5,10,000/-. Out of that amount, the 1/3rd was deducted and thereby the net amount comes to Rs. 3,40,000/-. 100/-per day for 25 days only in a month. In the later part, the Tribunal took the annual income of the deceased as Rs. 30,000/-and multiplied it by 17 by which the compensation amount assessed to Rs. 5,10,000/-. Out of that amount, the 1/3rd was deducted and thereby the net amount comes to Rs. 3,40,000/-. Again 50 per cent was deducted out of that amount on account of Contributory negligence and in this way the net compensation amount comes to Rs. 1,70,000/- As stated above, the procedure adopted by the Tribunal in assessing the compensation amount is wholly improper and unjustified. Moreover the deduction of 50 % of the amount on account of alleged contributory negligence is also wholly illegal and improper particularly when neither any issue was framed nor parties were given opportunity to adduce evidence to that effect. Even assuming negligence on the part of the deceased, 50 % ought not to have been deducted. Mr. Jha, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company opposed the enhancement of compensation. However, Mr. Jha very fairly submitted that instead of 50 % some fewer amounts could have been deducted. In our considered opinion, after deducting some amount on account of contributory negligence the claimants who are widow, widowed mother and minor children must get compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/-together with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants next submitted that there is no justification in granting interest at the rate of 6 % that too from the date of award. Learned counsel further submitted that the claimants diligently prosecuted the case and, therefore, they are entitled to get interest from the date of application. We find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. If the interest even at the rate of 6 per cent is calculated from the date of the claim application, the interest will reach to the extent of Rs. 1,80,000/-in addition to the amount of compensation. However, learned counsel for the appellants agreed for lump sum compensation amount inclusive of all interests. In the aforesaid premises, we hold that a compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-(Four Lakhs) inclusive of all interests will meet the ends of justice. This appeal is, therefore, allowed and the amount of compensation is enhance to Rs. 4,00,000/-(Four Lakhs) inclusive of all interests, costs etc.