Court No. - 27
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2616 of 2008 Appellant :- Smt. Baby And Another Respondent :- Sri. Prempal And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Kavita Tomar,Jai Raj Singh Tomar,Vidya Kant Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Mr Pradeep Kumar Sinha
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. Order on Appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present appeal has been preferred by the claimants appellants with a prayer for enhancement of compensation.
The counsel for the appellants has contended that the deceased was aged about seven years and, therefore, the award of compensation of Rs.51,500/- is not just and proper. The counsel for the appellants further contended that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nagma Bano Vs. Harish Chandar Gupta and others, 2017(1) AICC 692 has awarded Rs.5,00,000/- in the case of death of a child of three years.
The submission is that in the instant case, the deceased was aged about seven years and, therefore, the claimant is also entitled for enhancement of compensation in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Nagma Bano (supra).
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the deceased was a child and there was no proof of income. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the facts of the present case is just and proper and is not liable to be enhanced.
I have considered the rival submissions of the parties.
This court in the case of Nagma Bano (supra) has enhanced the compensation of Rs.1,27,500/- to Rs.5,00,000/- in the case of death of a child aged about of three years. The principles enunciated in the said judgment for enhancement of compensation is applicable in the facts of the present case.
Consequently following the judgement of this Court in the case of Nagma Bano (supra), the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.51,500/- to Rs.5,00,000/-. It is further provided that the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry 7% interest from the date of institution of claim petition.
The appeal is partly allowed and the award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above.
The insurance company is directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order on delay condonation application.
The application has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the cross objection.
No counter affidavit has been filed to the delay condonation application.
In absence of any objection, the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application are true, therefore, the reason shown for delay in filing the cross objection is bona fide. The delay in filing the cross objection is condoned.
The delay condonation application is allowed.
Order on cross objection no.2 of 2018.
The cross objection is not accompanied with statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- and as such, it is not maintainable in view of the judgement of Divison Bench of this Court in First Appeal From Order No.3165 of 2008 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sushma Gupta and others).
The cross objection is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 S.Sharma