Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1058 (MP)

Sita Batham v. Roopnarayan Dwivedi

2022-08-26

DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Appellants have preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the award passed by the 1st Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, in Claim Case No.127/2009 on 12.7.2010 by which their claim application was partly allowed and Insurance Company was ordered to pay by way of compensation a sum of Rs.3,96,000/-. 2. In brief facts of the case are that on the fateful day i.e. 29.8.2009 husband of appellant No.1 -Brijraj Batham along with his nephew was coming on foot to his house from Lahar Chauraha. At about 9 pm when they reached Jamna Wale Hanumanji, one Indica Car bearing registration No.HR 17-6510 which was being driven rashly and negligently came and dashed deceased Brijraj due to which he got serious injuries. He was brought to CHC and thereafter to Jayarogya Hospital, Gwalior. During treatment, on the same day he died. 3. Thereafter at police Station, Dehat, Distt. Bhind Crime No.368/2009 was registered. At the time of accident, deceased was aged about 36 year and was doing work in Ara machine and was getting Rs.500/- per day. From the aforesaid income, he used to maintain the appellants who were his family members. Due to his death, they became hand to mouth. They preferred claim application before the learned Claims Tribunal and vide impugned award aforesaid compensation has been given in their favour. Being dissatisfied with the award, this appeal has been filed by the claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased to be Rs.3,000/- per month which is on lower side. It should be Rs.4,000/-. It is further submitted that during penency of the appeal name of two appellants; appellant No.2 Jeetu Batham and appellant No.6 Smt. Prema Bai, has been deleted from the array of appellants as appellant No.6 has died during pendency of the appeal and appellant No.2 has been missing since long time and now only four appellants are available as dependents of the deceased, hence, it is prayed that dependency be calculated accordingly. It is further submitted that claimants are also entitled for future prospects in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi as reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and a sum Rs.70,000/- for loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should have been awarded. 5. It is further submitted that claimants are also entitled for future prospects in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi as reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and a sum Rs.70,000/- for loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should have been awarded. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has opposed the appeal on the ground that appellants could not prove the income of the deceased at the time of the accident. In this situation, learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month and no interference is warranted in the impugned award. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. It is an admitted fact that deceased died in the aforesaid accident and offending vehicle was insured with respondent No.2/Insurance Company. 8. As per the guidelines issued by the State Legal Services Authority, the minimum wages of an unskilled labourer at the time of accident i.e. 29.8.2009 were Rs.3520/-. Thus, it would be appropriate to assess the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3520/-. Therefore, His annual salary would be Rs.42,240/-. 9. As presently only four dependents of the deceased are surviving, their dependency should be 3/4th in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma @ Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation @ another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 . Thus, total amount comes to Rs.31,680/-. As the age of the deceased was 36 years, therefore, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi as reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 and Kirti and another vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., (2021) 2 SCC 166 claimants are entitled to addition of 40% in this amount towards future prospects. Thus, total amount comes to Rs.44,360/- . Looking to the age of the deceased in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma (supra) multiplier of 15 will be applicable. Thus, total amount comes to Rs.6,65,400/-. Beside this, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/- under miscellaneous heads (loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses<. Thus, total compensation comes to Rs.7,35,400/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,96,000/-. Thus, claimants are further entitled to a sum of Rs.3,39,400/-. Thus, total amount comes to Rs.6,65,400/-. Beside this, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/- under miscellaneous heads (loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses<. Thus, total compensation comes to Rs.7,35,400/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,96,000/-. Thus, claimants are further entitled to a sum of Rs.3,39,400/-. Rest of the terms and conditions of the award shall remain as it is. 10. With the aforesaid, this Misc. Appeal stands disposed of.