Veena Sinha And Ors vs Mukesh Jat And Ors

Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan, learned counsel for the M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd, Mr.

Bibhash Sinha and learned counsel for the M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Mr. Manish Kumar.

The claimants are the appellants before this Court.

They have preferred this Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of the award dated 02.01.2017 in Title(M.V.) Suit No.344 of 2012 passed by learned

District Judge-III-cum-M.A.C.T., Dhanbad whereby the claimants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.40,33,664/- along with interest

@6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 21.12.2012 till realisation of the said compensation amount.

Leaned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan has assailed the impugned award on the ground that the income of the deceased namely,

Surendra Prasad has been considered by the learned Tribunal on the basis of salary slip of September, 2012, which has been marked as exhibit-1.

Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that Surendra Prasad was travelling by Swift Car bearing registration No.DL-3C-BJ-5505

and as soon as he reached near Hotel Chitwan near Verma Petrol Pump situated on Jaipur Road, all of a sudden a Trailer bearing registration No. RJ-

01GA-8784 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently tried to overtake Car No. RJ-01-CA-0067 and crossed the divider due to which there was

collision with Maruti Swift Car, as a result of which Surendra Prasad sitting in Swift Car sustained serious injuries and died on the spot.

Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that occurrence took place on 03.10.2012 at about 11.45 A.M. and the deceased was

working as Revenue Karmachari in Sasaram Block, Govt. of Bihar having a salary of Rs.40,000/- per month and at the time of death he was 45 years

of age.

Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that this Court may consider the income of the deceased coupled with his age at the time of

accident and consider all other aspect of the matter as there is admitted clerical mistake while deducting 10% tax component from the salary. Apart

from this the learned Tribunal has paid less amount under the conventional head contrary to the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. as reported in (2017) 16 SCC 68 0and rate of interest has been awarded @6% instead

of @7.5% contrary to the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Dharmpal and Sons Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation [2008 (4)

JCR 79 (SC)], as such, this Court may take holistic views while enhancing the compensation.

Learned counsel for the M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., Mr. Bibhash Sinha has fairly submitted that admittedly there is arithmetical

error while deducting the income tax @ 10% and as such, there is apparent error in the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Mr. Manish Kumar has submitted that insurer of Swift Car bearing registration No.DL-3C-

BJ-5505, in which Surendra Prasad was travelling was M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and as such, learned counsel Mr. Manish Kumar has

submitted that vehicle was duly insured before the M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on which the deceased was travelling whereas offending vehicle

Trailer bearing registration No. RJ-01GA-8784 was duly insured before the M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. and as such, learned

Tribunal has rightly passed the judgment against M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned award, it appears that deceased Surendra Prasad died on 03.10.2012 in motor

accident while travelling in Swift Car bearing registration No.DL-3C-BJ-5505, which was dashed by a Trailer bearing registration No. RJ-01GA-8784

after crossing the divider. Surendra Prasad was aged about 45 years having a monthly income of Rs.40,000/- and as per salary slip September, 2012,

which has been marked as exhibit-1, the gross salary was Rs.36,090/- but on perusal of the certificate regarding salary of the deceased Surendra

Prasad issued by Circle Officer, Sasaram the gross salary of the deceased was shown as Rs.36,109/-. In view of the judgment passed by Apex Court

in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra) net income shall be gross salary minus componant of tax, as such, 10% of the gross salary, which comes to

Rs.3610.90 shall be deducted for computation of compensation which comes to Rs.32,499/-. Since the deceased has a fixed income and in the age

group of 45 years, as such, in view of the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors Vs. DTC & Anr (2009) 6 SCC

121, the future prospect to the tune of 30% was applicable in case deceased was having fixed income and in the age group of 40-50 years. Here the

deceased was govt. employee, in the age group of 45 years thus the amount comes to Rs.42,248/-. The annual income thus comes to Rs.42,248

x12=Rs.5,06,976/- and if the same is multiplied by multiplier of fourteen in view of the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma

(Supra) then total comes to Rs.70,97,664/-. 1/3rd of the same is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, which is to the

tune of Rs.23,65,888/- thus the total amount comes to Rs.47,31,776/- upon which Rs.70,000/- under the conventional head is applicable (Rs.15,000/-

funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/- loss of state and Rs.40,000/- loss of consortium). Thus total the amount comes to Rs.48,01,776/-, which is the total

compensation amount along with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

Accordingly, the Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs.48,01,776/- along with interest 7.5% from the date of filing of

the claim application till its realization.

Accordingly, this Miscellaneous Appeal is hereby allowed.