15.12.2025 Sl. No. 120 Court No.4 Ali CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE SIDE FMA 56 of 2024 Smt. Gita Barman & Anr.

Vs.

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

Mr. Smt. Rumili Basu, Adv. Durga Bagani .... for the appellants/claimants.

Mr. R. Chakraborty ...for the respondent No. 1 New India Assurance Co.

1. Learned advocate for the appellants/claimants and learned advocate for the respondent No. 1 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. are present.

2. Heard the learned advocates for the parties.

3. The appellant before this Court was a claimant in a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and is aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 13^th day of January, 2017 in MACC Case No. 171 of 2015. The case of the claimants/appellants may be summed up thus:

On 06.12.2014 at about 6 p.m. when the victim Gokul Barman was proceeding towards his house with one cycle from Assam More, at that time one truck bearing No. WB-39/2681 coming with high speed, rashly and negligently dashed the back side of Gokul Barman near Pancha Hotel, Haldibari more, P.S. Kotwali, District Jalpaiguri. As a result, Gokul Barman sustained severe injuries on different parts of his body and was admitted to Sadar Hospital, Jalpaiguri from where he was shifted to NBMC and finally succumbed there due to his injuries. At the relevant time the deceased was 39 years old having monthly income of Rs. 6000/-. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. Over such accident the complaint was lodged before the police authority and a case was started under Section 279/304A of the IPC. The respondent No. 1 Insurance Company appeared before the learned Trial Court and filed written statement. Issues were framed and the claimants/appellants adduced evidence.

4. Upon hearing the learned advocates and considering the evidences the learned Trial Judge was pleased to dispose of the claim case by observing and directing as follows:

“hence, ORDER That the M.A.C. case No. 171/15, u/s. 166 of the M.V. Act be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P. No. 2 being the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and as per provisions under Order 8 Rule 10 of the claimants are entitled to get compensation for a sum of Rs. 4,43,000/- and the O.P. No. 2 being the insurer of the offending vehicle being New India Insurance Co. Ltd. is to pay the said compensation of Rs.4,43,000/- to the petitioners by two A/C payee cheques of Rs.2,21,000/- each within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which this award shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of this claim application. The claim petition is thus disposed of accordingly”

5. The appellants/claimants being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the learned Trial Court has come up with the instant appeal.

6. It is the contention of the appellants that the learned Trial Court has considered the income of the victim to be Rs. 3,000/- and not Rs. 6,000/- although evidence was adduced by the employer of the victim in this regard.

7. It is further contended that the future prospect was also not taken into consideration by the learned Trial Judge and it is also contended that the learned Trial Judge did not award interest with the compensation.

8. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent No. 1 New India Assurance Company submits that the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is just and reasonable and it need not be interfered with.

9. Upon hearing the learned advocates and upon perusing the evidence adduced it appears that the claimants examined the employer of the victim and the employer adduced evidence wherein he stated that the income of the victim was Rs. 6,000/- per month. There is nothing in cross examination from which it could be derived that the victim earned less than Rs.6,000/-

10. Upon considering the evidence adduced this Court is of the view that Rs. 6,000/- ought to have been taken into consideratio