Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 570 (HP)

Joginder Singh v. Chanan Ram

2015-05-22

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2015
JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. 1. This application has been filed in FAO No. 157 of 2015, for condonation of 55 days’ delay, which has crept-in in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is granted and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. 2. These two appeals are outcome of a common judgment and award dated 15.7.2014, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Shimla, H.P. Circuit Court Theog in MAC Petition No.43-T/2 of 13/10, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.10,40,000/- alongwith 7.5% interest came to be awarded in favour of the claimants and insurer came to be saddled with the liability. 3. Both these appeals are being taken up together for disposal in order to avoid conflicting judgments. 4. The claimants have filed FAO No. 386 of 2014 for enhancement of compensation and the insurer has filed appeal No.157 of 2015, for exonerating them from the liability and saddling the insured with the liability. 5. The insured and driver have not questioned the impugned on any ground, thus it has attained finality so far as it relates to them. 6. The questions to be determined in these appeals are whether the amount awarded is excessive and whether the insurer has been rightly saddled with the liability? 7. I have gone through the impugned award. The Tribunal has awarded the just and appropriate compensation, which cannot be said to be meager in any way. It is apt to reproduce paras 39 and 40 of the impugned judgment and award herein: “39. Therefore, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, it is presumed that had Miss Ambika been alive, she would have got job and earned at least Rs.15,000/- per month as salary. The plea of the petitioners that deceased had 100% chances of placement, cannot be accepted in view of clause No.23 of the agreement Ext. PW3/A which clearly stipulates that after completion of course, there is “NO JOB GUARANTEE.” 40. The prospective monthly income of the deceased on the basis of course being perused by her is assessed to Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verm’s case supra, sum of Rs.7500/- per month can be taken as contribution to the family. Hence annual income would be Rs.7500x12= Rs.90,000/-. The prospective monthly income of the deceased on the basis of course being perused by her is assessed to Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verm’s case supra, sum of Rs.7500/- per month can be taken as contribution to the family. Hence annual income would be Rs.7500x12= Rs.90,000/-. Having considered age of the parents and accepting the fact that age of mother was between 45 to 50 years and of father more 50 years at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 11 (eleven). Therefore, the compensation works out to Rs.90,000/- x11=Rs.9,90,000/-. Apart from this, the petitioners are also entitled for a sum of Rs.25,000/- for loss of love and affection and additional sum of Rs.25,000/- as funeral expenses in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajesh & Others vs. Rajbir Singh & Others, 2013 (3) Civil Court Cases 015 (S.C.). Therefore, actual calculation of compensation under different heads is as under:- (i) Loss of dependency to the family Rs. 9,90,000/- (ii) Loss of love and affection Rs. 25,000/- (iii) Funeral Expenses Rs. 25,000/- Total Compensation Rs. 10,40,000/- 8. The compensation awarded can neither be said to be excessive nor meager at all. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that the compensation awarded is just and appropriate. 9. The insurer, through the medium of appeal filed by them, has sought exoneration on the ground which stands already discussed by the Tribunal in para 42 of the impugned award. It is apt to reproduce para 42 of the impugned award herein: “42. Admittedly, respondent No. 3 is the insurer of Tempo No.PB-03T-4804 as per goods carrying package policy Ext. RW-1/B. The vehicle was duly insured w.e.f. 25.3.2009 to 24.3.2010. The accident took place on 10.9.2009 during subsisting period of the insurance. There is nothing on record to infer that offending vehicle was being plied in contravention of the insurance policy Ext. RW-1/B and against the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Therefore, the respondent No.3, being the insurer of Tempo No. PB- 03T-4804 is liable to indemnify the compensation award.” 10. I have gone through the findings returned by the Tribunal, which are legal one, need no interference. 11. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed along with pending applications, if any. RW-1/B and against the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Therefore, the respondent No.3, being the insurer of Tempo No. PB- 03T-4804 is liable to indemnify the compensation award.” 10. I have gone through the findings returned by the Tribunal, which are legal one, need no interference. 11. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed along with pending applications, if any. The impugned award is upheld. 12. The insurer is directed to deposit the amount within six weeks from today in the Registry. The Registry, on deposit, is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award. Send down the record forthwith.