Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Bibhas Ranjan De, J.
Oriental Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Rupa Agarwal & Ors. - Respondents
F.M.A No. 843 of 2010, CAN 1 of 2010, 5, 6 of 2019 (CAN 298 of 2010, 3224, 3225 of 2019)
Decided On : 10-01-2023
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM - INCOME ASSESSMENT - INCOME TAX RETURN - SECTION 166 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 - The court examined the applicable legal principles governing the assessment of income in motor accident claims, particularly in relation to the use of income tax returns. The court discussed the relevance and evidentiary value of income tax returns in determining the income of the deceased.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Vinay Kumar Agarwal, died in a motor accident while traveling as a pillion rider on a scooter. The claimants, his widow and daughter, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation for the loss of income and other damages.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the assessment of income made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which relied on the income tax return submitted by the deceased's wife for the assessment year 2004 & 2005, showing an income of Rs. 2,63,584/-. The court found that the income tax inspector had proved the original income tax return filed on behalf of the claimants.
Issues: 1. Whether the income tax return submitted by the deceased's wife can be relied upon to determine his income prior to death? 2. Whether the principles laid down in the Supreme Court cases of Subbulakshmi and others Vs SuLakshmi and another and Shashikaka and others Vs Gangalakshmamma and another are applicable in the present case?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the income tax return submitted by the deceased's wife was admissible as evidence of his income prior to death, as it was proved by the income tax inspector. 2. The court distinguished the facts in the present case from those in Subbulakshmi and Shashikala, where the income tax returns were not proved by the income tax authorities.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal filed by the insurance company, upholding the award of compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
JUDGMENT
Bibhas Ranjan De, J. - The appeal is directed against the Judgement and award passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 6th Court, Alipore, 24 Pargans (South), in connection with MAC No. 03 of 2009 whereby Learned Judge awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 11,32,956/-.
2. The claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, on account of death of Vinay Kumar Agarwal in a motor accident on 16.04.2004 while he was travelling by a scooter as pillion rider was knocked down by the vehicle number OR-09D-2851d(Tipper) as a result, he died . At the time of death deceased was aged about 56 years having income of Rs. 2,63,700/- per annum from his commission agent business for supply materials to different companies. Accordingly, claimants i.e. widow of deceased and her daughter filed claim application with a prayer for compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,20,000/-.
3. Though owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the case but oriental Insurance company i.e insurer of the offending vehicles contested the case by filing written statement denying all material averments of the claim petition contending, inter alia, that Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation.
4. To prove the case claimants examined 4 (four) witnesses namely Rupa Agarwal, widow of the deceased as PW-1, Hrishikesh Naskar, Income Tax inspector of the concerned ward as PW-2, Anup Kr. Gutgutia, a partner of Boon Metal and Alloy Corporation as PW-3 and Sarat Kr. Sahoo claiming himself to be an eye-witness to that accident as PW-4. In course of their evidences a good number of documents were admitted in evidence as exhibit 1to19.
5. After considering the evidence on record Learned Tribunal assessed the compensation of Rs. 11,32,956/- taking the annual income of Rs. 2,63,584/- after statutory deduction in terms of Income Tax Return.
6. I have gone through the entire evidences of four all witnesses examined on behalf of the claimants and I do not find anything contrary to the observation of the Learned Tribunal regarding death of Vinay Kumar Agarwal by the involvement of the offending Tipper which was solely responsible for the accident. In fact, the accidental death of Vinay kunar Agarwal has been proved by the evidence of eye-witness (PW-4) together with F.I.R and charge sheet. Therefore, to eschew the prolixity, I refrain myself from going into further discussion on the issue of accident and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.
7. In fact, the instant appeal has been preferred only on the ground of income of the deceased at the time of death.
8. Learned Advocate, Mr. Sanjay Paul, appearing on the behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has submitted that Learned Tribunal ought to have considered the Income Tax Return submitted by the deceased himself prior to his accidental death, for the purpose of assessing the income of the deceased, at the time of death. In support of his contention, he relied on a case of Subbulakshmi and others Vs SuLakshmi and another (2008) 4 Supreme Court Cases 224, wherein Hon'ble apex Court observed in para 21 and 22 as follows:-
'21.The accident took place on 7.5.1997. Income tax returns were filed on 23.6.1997.
22. The Income Tax Returns (Exp. P-14), therefore, have rightly not been relied upon.'
9. Mr. Paul has further relied on a case of Shashikaka and others Vs Gangalakshmamma and another (2015 (2) T.A.C. 867 (S.C.) ,where Hon'ble Apex Court held in para 5, 10 and 16 as follows:-
'5. Aggrieved by the said award of the tribunal, the appellants filed appeal before the High Court seeking enhancement of compensation. The High Court modified the award by recalculating the income of the deceased. Taking the income tax returns of the deceased for the assessment years 2005- 06 and 2006-07, the High Court calculated average of the same and taken the income at Rs. 1,55,812/- per annum. After making deductions towards income-tax, professional tax and income fro
In determining the income of a deceased person in a motor accident claim, the court may rely on income tax returns that are duly proved by the income tax authorities.
The court emphasized the importance of considering Income Tax Returns and the deceased's actual income in determining the compensation amount in motor accident claims.
The court's decision was influenced by the consideration of income tax returns in determining the deceased's actual annual income and the subsequent recomputation of compensation.
The court emphasized that income tax returns are essential for determining compensation in motor accident claims, and the assessment must reflect just and fair compensation principles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of income tax return in determining the deceased's income and the application of statutory documents to award just compensation.
Income Tax Returns are valid self-proving documents for assessing compensation in motor vehicle accident claims.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
