2020 ACJ 1154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM AT GANGTOK

MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, J.

The Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant

Versus

Sa-Ngor Chotshog Centre, Rongyek and Ors. – Respondent

MAC App. No. 01 of 2018

Decided On : 10-04-2019

Acts/Rules/Orders:

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Section 2; Constitution Of India - Article 227; Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 - Section 1-A, Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 279; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 304A; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 337; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 338

Cases Referred:

Montford Brothers of St. Gabriel and Another vs. United India Insurance and Another (2014) 3 SCC 394

N.K.V. Bros. (P) Ltd. vs. M. Karumai Ammal and Others (1980) 3 SCC 457

Gujarat SRTC v. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai [AIR 1987 SC 1690]

Megjibhai Khimji Vira v. Chaturbhai Taljabhai [AIR 1977 Guj 195]

Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another (2009) 6 SCC 121

National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. AIR 2017 SC 5157

Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2012) 6 SCC 421

Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh, (2013) 9 SCC 54

Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan, (2013) 9 SCC 65

Advocate Appeared :

For the Appellant : Manish Kumar Jain, Advocate

For the Respondents : Ajay Rathi, Deepu Prasad and Phurba Diki, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. Assailing the award granted by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, East Sikkim at Gangtok (for short 'learned Tribunal') in MACT Case No. 14 of 2016 (Sa-Ngor Chotshog Centre vs. Mrs. Karuna Chettri & Anr.), the instant Appeal has been preferred. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation amounting to Rs. 15,02,500/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs, two thousand and five hundred) only, to the Respondent No. 1, on account of the death of Tamding Wangchuk (hereinafter 'deceased'), having reached a finding that the cause of accident was due to the rash and negligent act of the driver one Nirmal Chettri, and that the Respondent No. 1 was the legal representative of the deceased.

2. The Respondent No. 1 herein was the Claimant (hereinafter "Respondent No. 1 Centre') and Respondent No. 2 was the Opposite Party No. 1 before the learned Tribunal. The Appellant herein was the Opposite Party No. 2 before the learned Tribunal. Parties shall be referred to in their order of appearance before this Court.

3. The facts which have led to the instant Appeal are that the deceased aged about 32 years, was a permanent resident of the Respondent No. 1 Centre, a monastic institution and a study centre under the Shakya clan of Buddhism in Gangtok, East Sikkim. He had renounced the world having severed all ties with his family since the age of nine, was working as a Teacher at the Respondent No. 1 Centre and earning a monthly salary of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only. On 20.08.2012, the deceased was travelling in vehicle bearing Registration No. WB-76-4625 (Tata Spacio), driven by one Nirmal Chettri, which met with an accident at Hanuman Jhora under the jurisdiction of Kalimpong Police Station, District Darjeeling, West Bengal, at around 20:00 Hrs. On 21.08.2012, the deceased succumbed to his injuries in a Hospital in Kalimpong. One Jiten Chettri lodged the First Information Report pertaining to the accident on 21.08.2012 at 7.15 Hrs at Reang Police Post, under Kalimpong Police Station where a case under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC, 180') was registered against the driver of the vehicle. The body of the deceased, on completion of inquest and post mortem examination was handed over to the Manager of the Claimant Centre for the last rites. The cause of accident was, as per witnesses, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver Nirmal Chettri. The Respondent No. 1 Centre thus sought compensation of Rs. 2