Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
A.K.GOSWAMI, J.
Samir Bhattacharjee & Anr. – Appellants
Vs.
Ganeswar Boro & Ors. – Respondent
MAC Appeal No. 33 of 2001
Decided On: 29.03.2012
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - Vehicular Accident – Death – Claim Compensation - This appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation awarded to present appellants by judgment and order in MAC Case - By said judgment appellants were awarded inclusive of no fault liability with simple interest thereon per annum that is date of petition till realization of amount and United India Insurance Company Ltd was directed to pay awarded amount within a period of days - Claim petition came to be filed on account of death of wife of appellant No - 1 and mother of appellant No - 2 who died in a vehicular accident - Claim petition was filed by present appellant No - 1 for himself and for and on behalf of minor daughter who was a minor at relevant point of time – Held, There is no manner of doubt that learned Tribunal erred in determining just compensation - It has to be accepted that shall be starting point of computation of income – One third will have to be deducted from said amount to arrive at loss of dependency and therefore amount has to be deducted from amount and accordingly loss of dependency would be per annum - Basis of submission of learned counsel for Insurance Company that multiplier in instant case and based on fact that deceased was about years months at time of accident and therefore multiplier assigned for age group being should be adopted - Even though deceased had crossed years she was not years and therefore in considered opinion of Court multiplier of assigned for age group has to be applied and therefore no alteration is required in choice of multiplier adopted by learned Tribunal - Accordingly claim of a sum will be just compensation - learned Tribunal had awarded towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium which according to this Court is just and fair amount - However this Court is of opinion that some amount has to be paid towards loss of estate on which head no award was given - Considering matter in its entirety a sum is amount which appellants are held to be entitled to including loss of estate - Appeal is Allowed.
Arup Kumar Goswami, J.
1. Heard Mr. J.I. Borbhuiyan, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. By an order dated 28.9.2011, service on respondent Nos. 1 and 3 was deemed to have been effected. None appeared for respondent Nos. 1 and 3.
2. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred for enhancement of the compensation awarded to the present appellants by judgment and order dated 28.3.2001 in MAC Case No. 100 of 1998. By the said judgment, the appellants were awarded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- inclusive of no fault liability with simple interest thereon @ 9% per annum from 30.3.1998, that is, the date of petition till realisation of amount and the United India Insurance Company Ltd. was directed to pay the awarded amount within a period 30 days.
3. The claim petition came to be filed on account of death of Chitra Bhattacharjee, the wife of the appellant No. 1 and mother of the appellant No. 2, who died in a vehicular accident on 8.10.1997. The claim petition was filed by the present appellant No. 1 for himself and for and on behalf of the minor daughter Rachita @ Tandra, who was a minor at the relevant point of time.
4. The present appellants and deceased Chitra Bhattacharjee had boarded a Bus with registration No. AS-01-2777 from Adabari bus stand at Guwahati and as a result of rash and negligent driving, the bus skidded from road and turned turtle and fell into a gorge. As a result of the said accident, Chitra Bhattacharjee lost her life. The deceased was working as Civilian Switch Board Operator under 2 Coy.F.C.S.R. C/0 99 APO at Station Headquarter, Guwahati and her monthly salary, according to the salary certificate, Ext. A, was Rs.4,489/- and she was due to retire on superannuation on 31.1.2020. The learned Tribunal, taking note of the evidence of PW-3, who was the appellant No. 1, came to a finding that he was the earning member of the family and was not dependent on the earnings of the deceased wife though he had stated that the wife used to contribute about Rs.3,500/- per month towards running of the house. It was also held that the child alone was entitled to get compensation and the loss of dependency of the child was assessed at Rs.2,000/- per month. The age of the deceased having been determined as 35 years, multiplier of 16 was adopted. The learned Tribunal came to a conclusion that a sum of Rs.3,84,000/- would be the just compensation. To that, a sum of Rs.16,000/- was awarded towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium, thus, awarding, in total, a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-.
5. J.I. Borbhuiyan, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the award of compensation as granted by the learned Tribunal is, ex-facie, on the lower side and learned Tribunal lost sight of the principles that should govern award of compensation. He submits that the deceased was aged about 35 years at the time of her death and the future prospect of the deceased was totally ignored by the learned Tribunal. He has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, to impress upon this Court that an addition of 50% of actual salary of the deceased towards future prospects, should have added when she was having a regular job and was below the age of 40 years. Therefore, he submits that the learned Tribunal ought to have assessed the computation on income at Rs.6,733.00 (rounded of from Rs.6733.50), the said figure representing 50% addition to Rs.4,489/-, being the salary at the time of death. On the said basis, the income of the deceased would be Rs.80,802/- per annum. The learned counsel further submits that these material aspects of the matter having been totally overlooked by the learned Tribunal, the compensation is liable to be suitably enhanced.
6. Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company, also submits that the learned T
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
