Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
O.Chinnappa Reddy, M.R.Sharma and Harbans Lal JJ.
Joki Ram
Versus
Naresh Kanta
First Appeal Order No. 47 of 1972,84 of 1972,114 of 1972,
Decided On : MARCH 25, 1977
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTION 110-B - ASSESSMENT OF COMPENSATION - PRINCIPLES - CAPITALISATION OF ANNUAL INCOME - DEDUCTIONS - APPORTIONMENT AMONGST DEPENDANTS - LIABILITY OF INSURANCE COMPANY.
Fact of the Case:
Om Parkash Sharma, a Line Superintendent in the Haryana State Electricity Board, died in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of Sher Singh, the driver of a truck owned by Jokhi Ram. His wife and five minor children filed a claim for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 25,562, holding the truck owner, driver, and the insurance company liable.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal on issues of rash and negligent driving, employment of the driver, and timeliness of the application. It also rejected the insurance company's contention that it was not liable for the claim.
Issues: 1. Whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive and should have been limited to the amount that would yield a monthly interest equivalent to the monthly pecuniary loss to the applicants? 2. Whether the formula adopted by the Tribunal for calculating the amount of compensation was unwarranted? 3. Whether the liability of the deceased to maintain the minor children ceased on their attaining majority, and thus the pecuniary loss should not be determined based on the life expectancy of the deceased?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was not excessive and was based on sound principles. It rejected the argument that the compensation should be limited to the amount that would yield a monthly interest equivalent to the monthly pecuniary loss, as this approach was too rigid and did not take into account the uncertainties and imponderables involved in assessing damages. 2. The Court also rejected the contention that the formula adopted by the Tribunal for calculating the amount of compensation was unwarranted. It held that the Tribunal had correctly estimated the annual income of the deceased, made reasonable deductions, and multiplied the resulting amount by the number of years by which the life of the deceased was cut short. 3. The Court further held that the liability of the deceased to maintain the minor children did not cease on their attaining majority. It recognized that, according to prevailing customs and traditions in India, the obligation of the head of the family to maintain and educate the children continues until they are able to stand on their own feet and have a separate source of earning.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeals filed by the truck owner, driver, and the insurance company, with a modification that the insurance company's liability was limited to Rs. 20,000, as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act at the time of the accident.
HARBANS LAL, J.
1. These three appeals, F.A.Os. Nos.47, 84 and 114 of 1972, are before us for determination of two points of law on a reference from Tewatia, J., (as he then was) vide his order of 13.03.1975, and shall be disposed of by one judgment as all these three appeals were filed against the decision of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tribunal), dated November 6, 1971.
2. Shri Om Parkash Sharma, deceased, was returning from Fatehabad to Tohana on a motor-cycle driven by Surat Singh on January 28, 1969, at 7-30 P.M. At a distance of about three miles from Bhuna on Bhuna Fatehabad Road, a truck No. HRH-9071, driven by Sher Singh and owned by Jokhi Ram came rashly and negligently from the opposite side and dashed into the motor-cycle resulting into the death of Om Parkash Sharma and Surat Singh, First information report regarding this incident was lodged in the Police Station, Bhuna. Shrimati Naresh Kanta, wife of Om Parkash Sharma (deceased) and his five minor children, (four daughters and one son) filed an application under S. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act), before the Tribunal claiming compensation amounting in Rs. 1,40,000. The truck was insured with the Vanguard Insurance Company Limited Shri Jokhi Ram, Sher Singh and the Vanguard Insurance Company were impleaded as respondents as the owner, driver and the insurer of the truck, respectively. All the three respondents contested the claim. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:
1. Whether the, accident took place due to rashness and negligence of the driver, Sher Singh?
2. Whether the petition is in time?
3. Whether Sher Singh, driver, was in the employment of truck owner Jokhi Ram at the time of occurrence, and if go, its effect?
4. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any amount of compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?
5. Whether the insurance company is not liable for the claim of the petitioners for reasons given in their written statement?
6. Relief.
All the issues were decided against the appellants (respondents). Regarding issues Nos. 1 and 3, it was held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by Sher Singh, driver, the truck was owned by Jokhi Ram and that at the time of the occurrence, Sher Singh was in the employment of the owner of the truck as driver and was driving the truck. Issue No. 2 was also decided in favour of the applicants and the application was held to be within time. Issue No. 5 was decided against the insurance company and it was held liable for the claim of the applicants. On issue No. 4, the Tribunal came to the following conclusions;
1. that Om Parkash Sharma (deceased) was employed as a Line Superintendent in the Haryana State Electricity Board and was drawing a salary of Rs. 390 per month; and
2. that the wife of Om Parkash Sharma (deceased) got pension on the death of her husband at the rate of Rs. 120 per mensem.
After deducting Rs. 70 per mensem on account of rent of the house, Rs. 37 per mensem as share of the deceased and Rs. 60 per mensem as expenditure on himself out of his salary of Rs. 390 per mensem, in addition to Rs. 120 on account of the monthly pension, the loss to the applicants was assessed at Rs. 103 per mensem.
3. Om Parkash Sharma (deceased) was found to be 37 years old at the time of the accident and calculating his life expectancy at 60 years, damages for 23 years at the rate of Rs. 103 per mensem were calculated at Rs. 28,428.
4. Om Parkash Sharma (deceased) was insured for Rs. 2,000 which amount was received by the applicants after his death. After excluding one-third of this amount, Rs. 666 were deducted from the amount of damages. Besides, the gratuity amounting to Rs. 2,200 was also deducted. After making all these deductions, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 25,562 to the applicants and the insurance company was directed to pay this amount within two months.
5. Jok
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
