Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 211 (JK)

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. REKHA DEVI

2017-04-26

JANAK RAJ KOTWAL

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. With the consensus of learned counsel for both the sides the main appeal is taken up for final disposal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. This appeal by the Insurance Company against the judgment and award dated 12.3.2016 rendered by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kathua (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) is limited to the quantum of compensation only. 4. In a claim application under section 166, MV Act, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation on account of the death of late Sh. Ravinder Paul, who died in a Road accident on 19.09.2012 caused due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No. JK-02T-8000. The compensation has been awarded under the following heads; "1. For Loss of dependency Rs. 7,90,000/- 2. Funeral expenses Rs. 25,000/- 3. For love & affection to minor children Rs. 1,00,000/- 4. For loss of consortium to petitioner No. 1 Rs. 1,00,000/- Total : Rs.10,15,000/- (Rupees ten lacs and fifteen thousand only)" 5. Mr. D.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant submits precisely that the learned Tribunal has fallen in error by allowing the enhancement in the income of the deceased which was not permissible for the reason that the deceased was not in a permanent employment. Learned counsel refers to the legal position as discussed by the learned High Court Delhi in 'Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Usha & Ors., 2016 ACJ 2171'. 6. Confronted with the legal position as discussed in the said judgment, learned counsel for the claimants concedes that enhancement in income was not permissible in view of the legal position as it prevailed as at the time of the impugned judgment and prevails even now. Learned counsel for the claimants, however, pointed out that the learned Tribunal has fallen in error by scaling down the applicable multiplier from 15 to 13 as such scaling down is not permissible. To this learned counsel for the appellant concedes. 7. With the consensus of the learned counsel on either side and having regard to the legal position, the monthly income of the deceased as at the time of his death is taken as Rs. 4500/-, without allowing any enhancement. The monthly contribution of the deceased towards the claimants is taken as Rs. 3800/- and applicable multiplier as 15. 7. With the consensus of the learned counsel on either side and having regard to the legal position, the monthly income of the deceased as at the time of his death is taken as Rs. 4500/-, without allowing any enhancement. The monthly contribution of the deceased towards the claimants is taken as Rs. 3800/- and applicable multiplier as 15. In that the compensation under the head 'loss of dependency' would be Rs. 64,800/- (3600x12x15). The impugned judgment and award is, therefore, modified by reducing the compensation under the Head 'loss of dependency' from Rs. 7,90,000/- to Rs. 6,48,000 (Six lakhs forty eight thousand). All other conditions as imposed by virtue of the impugned judgment and award shall apply. The amount of compensation if deposited in this court shall be disbursed to the claimants and the excess amount shall be remitted back to the appellant. 8. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.