Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2022 DIGILAW 1532 (SC)

Biswanath Jena v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited

2022-09-22

S.ABDUL NAZEER, V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN

body2022
ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellants herein filed a claim petition against the respondents before the Third Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balasore, seeking compensation for the death of one Barendra Nath Jena caused by a motor vehicle accident occurred on 08.10.2017. 3. There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and the liability of the first respondent-Insurance company to pay the compensation. 4. The deceased was a Peon in Pipaleswar Girls High School, Jhadpipal and at the time of his death his monthly salary was Rs.25,404/-. The deceased was aged about 50 years at the time of his death. Taking into consideration his salary at Rs.25,404/-and after deduction of Rs.2500/- towards contribution of his professional tax, the Tribunal determined his annual salary at Rs.3,02,348/-. 1/3rd of his income was deducted towards his personal and living expenses. Multiplier of 13 was applied and the loss of dependency was determined at Rs. 26,20,358/-. The Tribunal further added 30% of his income towards loss of future prospects. The court below has also added Rs.30,000/- under other heads. Thus, a total sum of Rs.34,36,465/- was awarded towards compensation with interest @ Rs.7.5 p.a. from the date of the claim petition till its deposit. 4. However, the High Court has reduced the compensation amount to Rs.25,00,000/- without assigning any reason. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the Tribunal was right in awarding compensation of Rs.34,36,465/-. There is absolutely no justification for reduction of the compensation amount to Rs.25,00,000/- by the High Court. 6. Therefore, the order dated 06.03.2020 of the High Court, impugned herein, is set aside and the judgment dated 18.04.2019 of the Third Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balasore, in MAC Case No.490/2017, is restored. 7. The first respondent-Insurance Company (second respondent before the Tribunal) is directed to deposit the aforesaid amount in terms of the aforesaid order of the Tribunal before the Tribunal, if not deposited, so far. 8. The appeal is allowed accordingly. Parties are directed to bear their respective costs.