Advocates:
['KRISHNA SHANKER CHAUDHARY', 'RANJEET ASTHANA', '', 'S N PANDEY', 'M PANDEY', 'PUNEET SRIVASTAVA']

1

Court No. - 38

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 4469 of 2012

Appellant :- National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Respondent :- Asheet Kumar Srivastava And Others

Counsel for Appellant :- ,Krishna Shanker Chaudhary

Counsel for Respondent :- Ranjeet Asthana,M. Pandey,Puneet

Srivastava,S.N. Pandey

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Ranjeet Asthana, learned

counsel for claimant-respondent no.1 and Sri Puneet Srivastava, learned

counsel for respondent no.4-United India Insurance Company.

2.

The appellant National Insurance Company by means of present

appeal has assailed the award dated 19.09.2012 passed by the

MACT/Additional District Judge, Azamgarh in MACP No.373 of 2010

whereby the tribunal has awarded Rs.17,02,916/- alongwith 7% interest as

compensation to the claimant-respondent no.1.

3.

The sole contention advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is

that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is excessive and without any

basis. He submits that the claimant had suffered 60% disability in the

accident and, therefore, the tribunal ought to have applied multiplier on the

loss of monthly salary of the claimant. He submits that the tribunal has erred

in multiplying loss of income by 12 in computing the compensation. In

support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon

the judgemet of the Apex Court in the case of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar

and another 2011 (1) SCC 343. Para 14 of the said judgemet is reproduced

herein-below:-

“14. The assessment of loss of future earnings is explained below with

reference to the following illustrations:

Illustration `A': The injured, a workman, was aged 30 years and earning

Rs.3000/- per month at the time of accident. As per Doctor's evidence, the

permanent disability of the limb as a consequence of the injury was 60% and

the consequential permanent disability to the person was quantified at 30%.

The loss of earning capacity is however assessed by the Tribunal as 15% on the

basis of evidence, because the claimant is continued in employment, but in a

lower grade. Calculation of compensation will be as follows:

a) Annual income before the accident

:Rs.36,000/-.

b) Loss of future earning per annum (15%

of the prior annual income)

: Rs. 5400/-.

c) Multiplier applicable with reference

to age

: 17

2

d) Loss of future earnings : (5400 x 17)

: Rs. 91,800/-

Illustration `B': The injured was a driver aged 30 years, earning Rs.3000/- per month. His

hand is amputated and his permanent disability is assessed at 60%. He was terminated

from his job as he could no longer drive. His chances of getting any other employment

was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary was likely to be a pittance. The Tribunal

therefore assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 75%. Calculation of

compensation will be as follows:

a) Annual income prior to the accident

:Rs.36,000/-.

b) Loss of future earning per annum (75%

of the prior annual income)

: Rs.27000/-.

c) Multiplier applicable with reference

to age

: 17

d) Loss of future earnings : (27000 x 17)

: Rs. 4,59,000/-

Illustration `C': The injured was 25 years and a final year Engineering student. As a

result of the accident, he was in coma for two months, his right hand was amputated and

vision was affected. The permanent disablement was assessed as 70%. As the injured

was incapacitated to pursue his chosen career and as he required the assistance of a

servant throughout his life, the loss of future earning capacity was also assessed as 70%.

The calculation of compensation will be as follows:

a) Minimum annual income he would have

got if had been employed as an Engineer

: Rs.60,000/-

b)