National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Kanchan Devi and Others

Suresh Kait, J.—The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 15.02.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation as under:-

Interest at the rate of 9% per annum was also awarded from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that the respondents/claimants have filed the claim petition u/s 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and accordingly, the same has been considered by the learned Tribunal. However, while deciding the claim petition, the learned Tribunal has wrongly added 50% of income of the deceased towards future prospects ignoring the fact that the claim petition being filed u/s 163A of the Act, compensation ought to have been granted as per the provisions of Second Schedule attached to this Act.

Further argued, interest granted by the learned Tribunal at the rate of 9% per annum is on a very higher side.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/claimants has fairly conceded that the learned Tribunal has wrongly added 50% towards future prospects and the same may be deducted from the compensation amount.

Regarding grant of interest at the rate of 9% per annum, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants has submitted that it is the discretion of the court to grant just and fair compensation keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of the case.

Keeping in view the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants and the fact that the claim petition was filed u/s 163 of the Act, the impugned order dated 15.02.2012 qua grant of 50% towards future prospects is set aside.

Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants has also submitted that as per the Second Schedule of the said Act and keeping in view the age of the deceased, i.e., below 35 years, the learned Tribunal should have taken the multiplier of 17 instead of 16.

Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company does not dispute the abovementioned proposition of law.

Therefore, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and the age of the deceased, the appropriate multiplicand is 17.

I order accordingly.

So far as the issue of exorbitant interest being awarded by the learned Tribunal is concerned, the accident in question took place in the year 2008, the claim petition was filed in the same year and after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal has passed the impugned order dated 15.02.2012. Therefore, I do not find any discrepancy in granting interest at the rate of 9% per annum by the learned Tribunal and the same is maintained.

In view of the above discussion, the compensation amount would be as under:-

Resultantly, the compensation amount is reduced from Rs. 7,19,000/- to Rs. 5,06,750/-.

Vide order dated 28.05.2012, while granting stay on the execution of the impugned award, this Court directed the appellant/Insurance Company to deposit a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- alongwith proportionate interest in the name of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 with the Tribunal.

Consequently, the appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the balance compensation amount with proportionate interest accrued thereon with the learned Tribunal within a period of five weeks from today.

Thereafter, the learned Tribunal is directed to release the compensation amount along with upto date interest accrued thereon in favour of the respondents/claimants in terms of the award dated 15.02.2012 on taking necessary steps by them.

Statutory amount shall be released in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.

The Registry of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned Tribunal for compliance. The present appeal stands disposed of on above terms.