Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 264 (MP)

MANJU CHOUHAN v. BALWANT SINGH YADAV

2024-03-12

ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY

body2024
ORDER : (Roopesh Chandra Varshney, J.) : Being aggrieved by quantum part of impugned award dated 29-7-2021 passed by learned Member, Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claims Case No. 6400241/2015, appellants/claimants are before this Court. By the impugned award, the claimants (wife, children and mother) have been awarded a compensation of Rs. 16,60,750/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 31-8-2008 when deceased Dharmendra Singh Chauhan was going on his motorcycle from Banmore to Gwalior, it is alleged that as soon as he reached near Purani Chhawani Chauraha, due to rash and negligent driving of Mini Bus Driver/respondent No. 1, bus dashed the motorcycle due to which deceased suffered grievous hurts and died on spot. Due to death of deceased in motor accident, the appellants preferred a claim petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 30,00,000/- along with interest. 3. The respondents No. 1 and 2 filed written statement stating that the bus was insured with respondent No. 3 and therefore, liability for payment of compensation amount is over the Insurance Company. 4. Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company also filed written statement denying the contents made in the claim petition. It was stated that the bus was being driver without any fitness certificate and permit. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties and evidence produced, learned Claims Tribunal passed the impugned award, exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability and directing it to make the payment of compensation amount with liberty to recover the same from the respondents No. 1 and 2. 6. None appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 to assail the findings of learned Claims Tribunal. Even before the Claims Tribunal they remained ex parte after filing written statement. 7. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellants/claimants that learned Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,01,000/- ;whereas, as per income tax return of year 2008-09 (Ex.P/24), income of the deceased was Rs. 1,21,645/- and thus, learned Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the income of deceased on own presumption and conjectures. In support of his arguments, he relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the matter of Anjali and ors. 1,01,000/- ;whereas, as per income tax return of year 2008-09 (Ex.P/24), income of the deceased was Rs. 1,21,645/- and thus, learned Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the income of deceased on own presumption and conjectures. In support of his arguments, he relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the matter of Anjali and ors. vs. Lokendra Rathod and ors., 2023 ACJ 637 ; wherein, Apex Court held that ITR is a statutory documents and has to be relied on to assess the income and fixed the monthly salary of deceased in that case on the basis of ITR. 8. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company supported the impugned award and stated that the amount so awarded is just and proper and Insurance Company has rightly been exonerated by the impugned award. He prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 10. In the opinion of this Court, in the light of decision of Apex Court in the matter of Anjali (supra), the income of deceased is required to be assessed as per ITR. As per ITR, his annual income was Rs. 1,21,645/- and thus monthly income comes to Rs. 10,138/- rounded to Rs. 10,140/- per month. 1/4th towards personal expenditure has rightly been deducted by the Claims Tribunal and same is required to be done here and after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenditure, the amount remained is Rs. 10,140 - 2535/- = 7605/-. In this amount 40% is required to be added towards future prospects in light of decision of Apex Court in the matter of in the matter of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and ors., AIR 2017 SC 4973 and after adding the same, the monthly loss of dependency comes to Rs. 7605 +3042=10,647/- and yearly loss of dependency comes to Rs. 1,27,764/-. As per the age of the deceased, multiplier of 15 is required to be applied and after applying the same, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 19,16,460/-. To this amount, Rs. 70,000/- is required to be added under the conventional heads, like funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium and after adding the same, total compensation comes to Rs. 19,16,460 + 70,000 = 19,86,460/-. The Claims Tribunal has already awarded a compensation of Rs. 16,60,750/- therefore, claimants would be entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 70,000/- is required to be added under the conventional heads, like funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium and after adding the same, total compensation comes to Rs. 19,16,460 + 70,000 = 19,86,460/-. The Claims Tribunal has already awarded a compensation of Rs. 16,60,750/- therefore, claimants would be entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 19,86,460 - 16,60,750 = 3,25,710/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest as per impugned award. Rest of the conditions as imposed by the Claims Tribunal shall remain intact. 11. Thus, the appeal is allowed in part and impugned award is modified to the extent indicated hereinabove.