Form No. J(2)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay FMA 1479 of 2024 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus Moumita Bhattacharjee & Ors.

For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Singh For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. Subhankar Mandal Heard & Judgment on : 5^th February, 2025.

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J:

1. Both the Learned Advocates representing the appellant/Insurance Company and the respondents/claimants are present.

2. The instant appeal had been filed against the judgment and award dated 01.10.2024 passed by the Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Barasat, North 24-Parganas M.A.C. Case No. 6/2022.

3. An application under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act had been filed on account of the death of the victim in an accident which occurred on 16.02.2020 at about 7:30 P.M. with the involvement of the offending vehicle (Bolero) being No. WB 26AZ/3119 which hit the victim on his return towards his home being a passenger of the Bolero which on its approached near Desmukh, Dankuni Side (27 No. Road) collided with another vehicle resulting in serious injuries being sustained by the victim who ultimately expired at Chanditala Gramin Hospital.

4. The learned Advocate representing the appellant/Insurance Company submits that the offending vehicle being the Bolero had been the victim of the accident and, therefore, was not liable for paying the compensation.

5. The learned Advocate representing the respondent Nos. 1 and

2/claimants submitted that the learned Tribunal considering each and every aspect of the claim application concerning the accident in question granted the compensation amount which should not be interfered with. The learned Tribunal in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the impugned judgment and order opined as follows:-

“8. Learned Advocate for the petitioners/claimants referred to the notification of the Ministry of Transport and Highways ated 22^nd May, 2018. It is related to amendment of Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the then existing schedule was substituted by a new schedule by virtue of the said notification. After going through the substituted schedule it appears that the compensation payable in case of death under Sec-163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was fixed to be Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) irrespective of the income of the victim/deceased at the material time of the accident.

9. In view of the above notification, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to get the compensation amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupes Five Lakh only) in connection with this case under Section – 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The petitioners/claimants are further entitled to get an interest @ 6% over such compensation amount from the date of filing of this case till the dat4e of realization of the compensation amount. In addition to that the petitioners shall get a sum of Rs.20,000/- for loss of consortium, a sum of Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and a sum of Rs.15,000/-for loss of estate”.

6. In view of the notification 22nd May, 2018 and the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Urmila Halder v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd1. the respondent No.1 and 2/claimants is entitled to composite sum of Rs.50,0,000/- which is the consolidated compensation taken into account various heads which might be implied. Therefore, an additional sum of Rs.50,000/- should not have been granted. In contradiction to the intent and purport of the aforesaid notification as well as the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Urmila Halder v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. the contention of the learned Advocates representing the appellant/Insurance Company in view of the essence of an application under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act as well as the aforesaid notification the offending vehicle to claim itself to be the victim of the accident is not maintain