Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Suman And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 January, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Heard Sri S.K. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. These appeals have been filed by the insurance Company on two grounds namely, the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and not the owner of the vegetables being carried in the truck. Secondly, the present accident covers of only one passenger under the policy whereas, there were four insured/deceased in the accident, therefore, cover is not extendable to others except one passenger.
3. Sri S.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the claimants in his turn submits that in First Appeals arising out of the same accident, two of the appeals have already been withdrawn by the Insurance Company namely, F.A.F.O. No.4277 of 2011 and 4275 of 2011, therefore, this plea of gratuitous passenger or that of policy covering only one passenger is not made out. It is also submitted that claimants have filed cross objections on three grounds namely, since deceased was aged about 19 to 20 years, multiplier of 18 will be applicable in place of 16, as applied by the learned Claims Tribunal. Secondly, there will be an addition of 40% towards future prospects and thirdly under head of non-pecuniary compensation only a sum of Rs.9,500/- has been awarded, whereas, under the head of non pecuniary compensation, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is payable.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is apparent that when two of the appeals have been withdrawn by the Insurance Company involving persons in the same accident, then plea of either gratuitous passenger or that of not being covered by policy terms and conditions is not made out.
5. Therefore, appeal filed by the Insurance Company deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed.
6. As far as cross objections in F.A.F.O. No.4181 of 2011 are concerned, it is apparent that age of the deceased has been taken to be 20 years. Income has been taken at Rs.3,000/- per month. Tribunal has wrongly applied deduction to the extent of 1/3, whereas, in case of a bachelor, it will be 50%, therefore, monthly dependency will be Rs.1500/- or Rs.18,000/- per year. When 40% is added, then total pecuniary dependency will be Rs.25,200/- per anuum. Multiplier of 18 is applicable, taking total pecuniary compensation to Rs.4,53,600/-(four lakhs fifty three thousand and six hundred). Over and above which, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the head of non-pecuniary compensation, taking total compensation to Rs.4,83,600/-(four lakhs eighty three thousand and six hundred) against Rs.3,93,500/-(three lakhs ninety three thousand and five hundred) granted by the learned Claims Tribunal, therefore, there will be an enhancement to the tune of Rs.90,100/-(ninety thousand and one hundred) in favour of the claimants.
7. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact and shall applied to enhance amount also.
F.A.F.O. No.4182 of 2011.
8. As far as cross objections in F.A.F.O. No.4182 of 2011 are concerned, they have been taken on following three grounds, namely, deceased is survived by five legal heirs, therefore, deduction will be to the extent of 1/4 in place of 1/3, as has been allowed by the Tribunal. Secondly, age of the deceased was between 35 to 40 years, therefore, multiplier of 15 will be applicable and thirdly, appropriate future prospects @ 40% are to be added besides a sum of Rs.70,000/-(seventy thousand) is payable under the head of non-pecuniary compensation against a sum of Rs.19,500/- paid by learned Tribunal.
9. Income of the deceased has been accepted to be Rs.3,000/- per month, when 25% is deducted towards living expenses of the deceased, then monthly dependency will come out to Rs.2250/- and 40% is added towards future prospects, it will be Rs.3150/- per month or 37,800/-(thirty seven thousand and eight hundred) per annum. Multiplier of 15 will be applicable, taking total pecuniary compensation to Rs.5,67,000/-(five lakhs and sixty seven thousand). Over and above which, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/- taking total compensation to Rs.6,37,000/-(six lakhs and thirty seven thousand) against Rs.4,03,500/-(four lakhs three thousand and five hundred) awarded by learned Claims Tribunal. Therefore, there will be an addition of Rs.2,33,500/-(two lakhs thirty three thousand and five hundred). This amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition.
10. It is further directed that this enhanced amount shall also be appropriated amongst the claimants in the same ratio, in which it has been appropriated between claimant nos.1 to 5 and shall be invested in a fixed deposit receipt for claimant nos.2 to 5 for such a period, and may be further renewed till the age of the majority.
11. It is further directed that in case, any pre-deposit made under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act has not already been remitted to the learned Claims Tribunal be permitted to the same to be adjusted from final disbursal of the claim amount.
Order Date :- 27.1.2021 Ashutosh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Suman And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 January, 2021
Judges
  • Vivek Agarwal