Court No. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2934 of 2006 Appellant :- Devendra Kumar Respondent :- Wazid Ali And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nigamendra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Avanish Mishra,Sumod Kumar Srivastava,Subodh Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Heard Shri Nigamendra Shuka, learned counsel for the appellant-claimant, Shri Subodh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the owner and Shri Avanish Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent.
This first appeal from order has been preferred by the appellant- claimant against the impugned judgment and award dated 26.7.2006, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Judge SC & ST Act, Meerut, in MACT No.385 of 2001 (Devendra Kumar vs. Wazid Ali & others).
Brief facts of the case are that the claimant, namely, Devendra Kumar, who was riding his scooter bearing No.DL-8-MN-5600 from Simbhawali to Junupur on 13.2.2001 dashed with a jeep bearing No.UP-23-6601. The injured Devendra Kumar was temporary employee of Simbhawali Sugar Mill. The Tribunal granted a lum sum amount Rs.40,000/- with 6% rate of interest, which has been requested to be enhanced. During the accident, there was a fracture on the right leg, knee bone was fractured rather dislocated and his two teeth was broken, which has been admitted in a hospital at Meerut and for this the Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head, pain, shock and suffering.
Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submitted that the Tribunal has fallen in an error while not considering the amount as per the judgment prevailing in those days for the said liability causing injury.
The CMO, Meerut, has considered the disability of 40.5%, which according to Shri Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents, is not functional disability as he has not lost his job. The functional disability is considered to be 15% as there was no proof of his income as an employee of Simbhawali Sugar Mill.
It can be considered that the income of the injured was Rs.2000/- per month at the time of accident.
This Court is not in agreement with the submission made by learned counsel for the respondent that the multiplier and the income of the injured cannot be disturbed. However, the Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head of attendant charges, special diet and for future medicine, the consolidated amount of Rs.22,000/- was granted and the Tribunal granted only Rs.40,000 with 6% rate of interest, namely, Rs.18000/- for future loss of income to Devendra, who was 22 years of age and had fixed income. However, it was not proved that he was in employement and, therefore, notional future loss of income would have to be considered and, therefore, 40% addition to the income of Rs.2000 being a driver in the year of accident, namely, 2001 would meet the end of justice. Thus, Rs.3000/- would be the annual income of the injured. He had 20% functional disability. Hence, Rs.600 x 12 x 18 = Rs.1,29,600/- would be the future loss of income which was not awarded would accrue for his benefit as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Syed Sadiq Etc Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company, 2014 (1) TAC 369 and the judgment of the undersigned as relied by the counsel for the appellant in First Appeal From Order No. 3199 of 2004 (Hari Babu Vs. Amrit Lal and Others) decided on 4.4.2019 and the interest would be 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the award and 6% thereafter till the amount is deposited.
The claimant would be entitled to a further sum of Rs.50,000/- under other non-pecuniary heads. Hence, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.1,29,600/- + Rs.50,000/- + Rs.22,000/-(medical expenses as awarded by the Tribunal) = Rs.2,01,600/- rounded up to Rs.2,00,000.
As far as issue of rate of interest is concerned, the interest should be 7.5% in view of the latest decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal and Others, 2019 (2) T.A.C. 705 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court has held as under :
"13. The aforesaid features equally apply to the contentions urged on behalf of the claimants as regards the rate of interest. The Tribunal had awarded interest at the rate of 12% p.a. but the same had been too high a rate in comparison to what is ordinarily envisaged in these matters. The High Court, after making a substantial enhancement in the award amount, modified the interest component at a reasonable rate of 7.5% p.a. and we find no reason to allow the interest in this matter at any rate higher than that allowed by High Court."
No other grounds are urged orally when the matter was heard.
In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The respondent-Insurance Company shall first deposit the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the amount is deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today and then recover the same from owner as per the order of Tribunal. I have not decided the issue of breach of policy as owner has chosen not to appear. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 LN Tripathi