New India Assurance Company Limited vs Resham Shukla & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

This appeal from order arises out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udham Singh Nagar dated 29.05.2018 passed in MACP No. 248 of 2016, whereby a compensation of Rs. 7,78,750/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty only) has been awarded to the claimants.

Brief facts of the case are that Sri Kishan Bahadur Shukla (deceased) was an employee in a shop of one Bittu Sharma. On 06.06.2016 when the deceased after completing his day's work he came out of the shop, and while he was near the bridge of leprosy Ashram on Kichha-Rudrapur road, a truck bearing registration no. NL-01D-7552 which was registered in the name of one Manik Lal Singh, (opposite party no. 2 in the claim petition) hit the deceased on his back, as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The truck was admittedly insured with the insurance company, i.e. the appellant before this Court.

On account of the death of Kishan Bahadur Shukla in a motor accident, a claim petition was filed by the claimants seeking a compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh only). It was alleged in the claim petition that the deceased was doing job in the shop of one Bittu Sharma and was getting Rs.8,000/- (Rupees Eight Thousand only) per month as salary. It was further alleged that the claimants were fully dependent on the deceased and due to death of the deceased they have suffered irreparable loss.

Written statements were filed by the owner and the driver of the vehicle as well as the Insurance Company, with which the truck involved in the accident, was insured.

On the basis of the rival pleadings of the parties, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:-

"1. Whether on 06.06.2016 at about 09:30 P.M. near Leprosy Ashram Gate, at Kichha-Rudrapur Road, P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Truck No. NL-01D-7552 by its driver, as a result of which, Kishan Bahadur Shukla died due to injuries sustained by him in the accident? If yes then its effect?

Whether on the date of accident the driver of the vehicle in question was having valid and effective driving licence and the insurance and the permit were not valid and effective? If yes then its effect?

Whether the claimants are entitled for compensation in the present claim petition? If yes then to what extent and from which of the parties?"

So far as issue no. 1 is concerned, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle in question. This finding of the learned Tribunal is based on the evidence available before the Tribunal in the form of P.W. 2 Vinit Tiwari and PW 3 Yadram Shukla who are the eyewitnesses of the incident. PW2 Vinit Tiwari has said in his statement that when he was going to his house on his motorcycle from Kichha on 06.06.2016 and when he reached near Leprosy Ashram, he saw that the driver of the offending vehicle hit the deceased which was being driven in rash and negligent manner by its driver. PW 3 Yadram Shukla also states the same in his statement that when he was coming with his brother and when he was 20 feet ahead from his brother, he saw that the offending vehicle hit his brother. He further said that the vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver.

So far as issue no. 2 is concerned, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the driver of the vehicle was having valid and effective driving licence with all valid papers, such as, insurance and permit at the time of the accident.

As regarding the quantum of compensation, the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand Five Hundred only) per month i.e. Rs. 54,000/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand only) per annum. This amount was enhanced by the learned Tribunal by 25% towards future prospects and calculated the annual income as Rs. 67,500/- (Rupees Sixty Seven Thousand Five Hundred only). On this amount, the learned Tribunal considering the age of the deceased as 41 years applied the multiplier of 14 and calculated the amount as Rs. 9,45,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Forty Five Thousand only). Out of this amount, the learned Tribunal deducted one-fourth towards personal expenses and calculated the dependency income as Rs. 7,08,750/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty only).

Apart from the above, the learned Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards loss of estate, Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) towards loss of consortium and Rs. 15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards funeral expenses. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 7,78,750/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty only) along with six per cent interest from the date of filing of the claim petition was awarded by the learned Tribunal.

Aggrieved the insurance company has filed the present appeal.

This Court is of a considered view, that the learned Tribunal has considered each and every aspect of the case and has rightly awarded the compensation, which calls for no interference. Consequently, no interference is called for by this Court. The appeal from order is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

Let the entire amount along with the interest as directed by the Tribunal be deposited by the insurance company with the concerned Tribunal after adjusting the amount already deposited. After the entire amount is deposited by the insurance company, let the same be released in favour of the claimants within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. The statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) be also remitted to the concerned Tribunal.

Let a copy of this judgment along with the lower court record be sent to the concerned Tribunal for onward compliance.