Cholamandalam Ms General Ins. Co. Ltd. vs Shudha and Others

Suresh Kait, J.—Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 13.04.2011, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs. 23,93,840/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition, till the date of realization. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that ld. Tribunal has fell in error while considering the salary of the deceased as Rs. 11,500/- per month without verifying the salary certificate.

Ld. Counsel further submitted that said certificate has not been proved by the employer of the deceased as to whether the deceased was actually drawing the said salary of Rs. 11,500/- per month. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence, ld. Tribunal ought not have relied upon the salary certificate produced by the claimants.

Ld. Counsel further submitted that the ld. Tribunal has further fell in error while granting 50% future prospects while awarding the compensation.

On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/claimants submits that the claimants produced the salary certificate of the deceased Ex. PW1/B, however, the insurance company did not controvert the salary certificate except by putting a bald statement that the salary certificate was a forged document. The insurance company has verified the said certificate through their investigator. Same is evident from the proceedings dated 06.04.2011 before the ld. Tribunal.

Moreover, there was no evidence contrary to claims established by the claimants. That apart, the Investigator of the insurance company has admitted the fact of the salary. Therefore, in my opinion, there was no necessity to bring any witness to prove the same.

Accordingly, ld. Tribunal has rightly considered the salary of the deceased as Rs. 11,500/- per month.

So far as the issue of future prospects is concerned, ld. Tribunal has relied upon a case of Shakti Devi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. decided on 09.11.2010 in Civil Appeal no. 3660/2006, wherein the future prospects @ 50% has been added in the cases where the age of the deceased is less than 40 years.

Moreover, recently in the case of Rajesh and Others Vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, the Apex Court has held as under:

Since the Court in Santosh Devi''s case (Supra) actually intended to follow the principle in the case of salaries persons as laid in Sarla Verma''s case (Supra) and to make it applicable also to the self-employed and persons on fixed wages, it is clarified that the increase in the case of those groups is not 30% always; it will also have a reference to the age. In other words, in the case of self-employed or persons with fixed wages, in case, the deceased victim was below 40 years, there must be an addition of 50% to the actual income of the deceased while computing future prospects. Needless to say that the actual income should be income after paying the tax, if any. Addition should be 30% in case the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years.

The deceased was 39 years of age at the time of accident. Therefore, keeping in view the dictum of Rajesh & Ors. (Supra), I do not find any discrepancy in the order passed by the ld. Tribunal on the issue of future prospects.

Accordingly, instant appeal stands dismissed.

Consequently, balance award amount shall be released in favour of the respondents/claimants Statutory amount be also released in favour of the appellant.

CM. No. 13419/2011

With the disposal of the appeal itself, this application has become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.