National Insurance Company vs Chattar Singh And Others

Sanjeev Kumar, J

1 The present appeal has been filed by the National Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act') against the award dated 16.04.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Doda (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in file No. 94/C whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.6,72,800/-along with interest @ 8% per annum in favour of respondent No.1/claimant.

2 Briefly stated the facts, relevant to the disposal of this appeal, are that 07.09.2009, the deceased was travelling in the Bus bearing registration No. JK02D-6339 (hereinafter refereed to as the 'offending vehicle') which was coming from Doda to Jammu and when it reached near Assar at 1.15 pm, it met with an accident, as a result whereof, the deceased sustained multiple injuries to which he later on succumbed. The offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, respondent No.3.

3 Respondent No.1 filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.21,20,000/- from the respondents. It was claimed in the petition that the deceased was working as an SPO and was also a fruit grower.

4 On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

(i) Whether on 07.09.2009 the deceased Pritam Singh was travelling in the vehicle bearing No. JK02D-6339 from Doda to Jammu and while reaching near Assar the vehicle met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver due to which the deceased died ? OPP

(ii) If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled to and from whom ? OPP.

(iii) Whether the respondent No.3 was not holding valid and effective D/L at the time of accident if so what is its effect on the claim petition ? OPR-1

(iv) Whether the offending vehicle was being driven in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and the route permit and was overloaded at the time of accident, if so, what is its effect on the claim petition ? OPR-1

(v) Whether the respondent No.3 was holding a fake driving licence at the time of accident if so what is its effect on the claim petition ? OPR-1

(vi) Relief- Onus on parties.

5 On the basis of evidence on record, the claimant was held entitled to compensation of Rs.6,72,800 along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.

6 In the backdrop of aforesaid, the present appeal has been filed by the insurer. Though several grounds are raised in this appeal, the insurer restricted its challenge to the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly taken the income of the deceased as Rs.5100 per month.

7 Learned counsel for the insurer submits that the deceased was working as an SPO in the Police Department and at that time he was getting Rs.3000/-per month as his wages/salary. However, the Tribunal has erroneously added Rs.2000/- per month as an agriculture income of the claimant which is not sustainable in law as there was no evidence on record with regard to the agricultural income of the claimant.

8 Heard learned counsel for the insurer and perused the record.

9 I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the insurer that the Tribunal has wrongly taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.5100/-per month. Admittedly, the deceased was working as SPO in the Police Department and at that time, he was getting Rs.3000/- per month as wages/salary. Since the deceased was SPO in the police department, therefore, he was required to be on 24 hours duty. There is hardly any occasion for him to do any other work like agriculture work. Therefore, the Tribunal instead of taking his monthly income as Rs.5100/- should have taken his monthly income as Rs.3000/-. On that count, the Tribunal was wrong.

10 From the perusal of impugned award, it transpires that the Tribunal has also wrongly applied the multiplier of 16, where as it was the multiplier of 18 that was applicable in view of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 as the deceased was 22 years old at the time of accident. The increase by 50% towards future prospectus has also not been taken note of by the tribunal as provided in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi and ors, AIR 2017 SC 5157. Since the deceased was unmarried and, therefore, deduction @ 50% of the income was required to be made, whereas the Tribunal has wrongly applied the deduction @ 1/3rd of the income. Similarly, the amounts awarded under the conventional heads are also on the lower side.

12 In view of the aforesaid, the impugned award is modified to the following extent:

Loss of dependency Rs.4,86,000/- (2250x12x18)

Funeral expenses Rs. 15000/-

Loss of estate Rs.15000/-

Loss of filial consortium to claimant Rs.40000/-

Total Rs.5,56,000/-

Interest awarded by the Tribunal is, however, not disturbed.

13 Appeal is disposed of in the above terms and the award of the Tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The amount deposited in the Registry shall be released in favour of the claimant in the terms of the modified award after proper identification and verification. The excess amount shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company.