IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ARCHANA PURI, J.
Kailash and another - Appellants
Versus
Usha Devi and others - Respondents
FAO-9782-2014 (O&M), FAO-1228-2015 (O&M)
Decided on : 01-09-2023
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Compensation - Motor Vehicle Act, Section 66, Section 69 - National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009 - Smt.Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr., 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77 - Harpreet Kaur and others vs. Mohinder Yadav and others, 2023(1) RCR (Civil) 327 - Janabai and others vs. M/s I.C.I.C.I. Lambord Insurance Company Ltd., 2022(4) RCR (Civil) 85 - Hans Raj Chaudhary vs. Smt. Nanhi Devi and others, 2013(7) RCR (Civil) 2574 - Future General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Surjo Devi and others 2013(2) RCR (Civil) 564 - National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Rajinder Giri and others 2012(2) RCR (Civil) 183 - Banshidhar vs. Smt.Krishna and others, 2018(1) PLR 415 - National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Chella Bharathamma, 2004(4) RCR (Civil) 399 - Haryana Compassionate to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 - CA No.9654 of 2016, titled as Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shashi Sharma and others
Fact of the Case:
Two appeals were filed to challenge the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the death of Bajrang in a motor vehicular accident. The widow and children of the deceased sought enhancement of the compensation, while the driver and owner of the offending vehicle disputed the findings and extent of compensation. The Tribunal had granted compensation of Rs.47,60,758/- to the claimants, holding the driver and owner jointly and severally liable, but absolving the insurance company from any liability.
Finding of the Court:
The court re-evaluated the compensation based on the deceased's salary, considering legal provisions and case law. It held the insurance company jointly and severally liable with the driver and owner, and allowed the enhancement of compensation to Rs.55,95,684/-. The court also addressed the deduction of compensation received under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006.
Issues: The issues revolved around the assessment of compensation for the deceased's death in a motor vehicular accident, the liability of the driver, owner, and insurance company, and the deduction of compensation received under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied legal principles from National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others, Smt.Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr., and other relevant cases to determine the compensation. It also interpreted the Motor Vehicle Act, Section 66 and Section 69, and addressed the deduction of compensation under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance Rules.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeals, holding the insurance company jointly and severally liable with the driver and owner, and enhancing the compensation to Rs.55,95,684/-. It also directed the deduction of compensation received under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance Rules.
JUDGMENT :
ARCHANA PURI, J.
1. These are two appeals, filed by the rival parties to assail the Award dated 29.08.2014 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to ‘Tribunal’), whereby, compensation was granted, on account of death of Bajrang, in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 24.06.2013.
2. For the convenience of the discussion, the parties are referred to as making appearance before the Tribunal.
3. On appraisal of the evidence, brought on record, learned Tribunal had granted compensation, to the extent of Rs.47,60,758/-, to the claimants. The liability was fastened only upon the driver and owner (respondents No.1 and 3) of offending vehicle bearing registration No.RJ- 32PA-1734, jointly and severally. However, the insurance company was absolved from any liability.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid Award, FAO-9782-2014 has been filed by the driver and owner, namely Kailash and Parkash Chand, respectively, to challenge the findings of exoneration of the Insurance Company from making payment of the compensation, so worked upon. Besides the same also, the driver and owner have disputed the extent of compensation, so worked upon.
5. Claimants-appellants filed FAO-1228-2015, thereby, seeking enhancement of the compensation, so awarded by learned Tribunal.
6. So far as the fact of accident and the involvement of the offending vehicle is concerned, none of the parties to the lis have challenged the same. As such, the findings so arrived, qua the same by learned Tribunal, has since attained finality.
7. Firstly, let us consider the compensation, so granted to the claimants. The widow of the deceased namely Usha Devi, stepped into witness box as PW-2 and she has tendered into evidence, her affidavit Ex.PW2/A, wherein, she has deposed about her husband to be working as PTI Teacher in Government School, village Niyajalipur (Naya Gaon) and that he was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, as salary, besides the service benefits.
8. Further also, claimants had examined PW-1 Pankaj, Clerk, Govt. Middle School, Niyajalipur, who had brought the annual salary certificate of Bajrang, who was posted in their school. PW-4 Sandeep, Clerk, O/o Block Education Officer, had brought the record pertaining to service of Bajrang, who was working as PTI Teacher in GMS, Niyajalipur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh. He deposed that date of birth of Bajrang was 10.04.1984. He joined as PTI Teacher on 07.05.2010 and was to retire on 30.04.2042. He proved the attested copy of service book of Bajrang as Ex.P3. Thus, from the aforesaid evidence, coming on record, it stands established that in the month of May 2013, the salary of the deceased was Rs.27,727/-.
9. As per National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009, salary minus tax is to be taken into consideration to work upon the compensation. Considering the monthly salary of Rs.27,727/-, the annual salary of the deceased comes to be Rs.27,727x12=Rs.3,32,724/-. However, tax has to be deducted from the aforesaid extent of annual earnings.
10. In the tax slab existing in the year 2013-2014, there was tax exemption upto the income of Rs.2,00,000/-. After deducting the same, the taxable income of the deceased comes to be Rs.1,32,724/-, upon which, 10% tax was liable and after deducting 10% i.e. Rs.13,272/-, the extent of earnings, as such, comes to be Rs.3,32,734-13,272=Rs.3,19,452/-.
11. Deceased Bajrang was a government employee and considering the date of birth of the deceased i.e. 10.04.1984, at the relevant time, he was 29 years old. Considering this age of deceased, addition of 50%, ought to be made, on the count of ‘future prospects’ in the case of government job. Thus, addition of Rs.1,59,726/- is to be made further and after making such addition, the annual earnings of the deceased, comes to be Rs.3,19,452+1,59,726=Rs.4,7
Banshidhar vs. Smt.Krishna and others
Future General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Surjo Devi and others 2013(2) RCR(Civ) 564
National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Chella Bharathamma
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Rajinder Giri and others 2012(2) RCR(Civ) 183
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation for motor vehicular accidents, the liability of the driver, owner, and insurance company, and the deduction of compe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the joint and several liability of the insurance company, driver, and owner in a motor vehicle accident, as well as the principles governing the ca....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.