Court No. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2056 of 2019
Appellant :- Smt. Shabana Bee Since Deceased And Others Respondent :- New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- A.L. Jaiswal,Sharve Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Vipin Chandra Dixit
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Heard Sri Sharve Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri V.C. Dixit, learned counsel for the respondents.
This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment dated 15.07.2006 and decree dated 22.07.2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.7, Bareilly (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No.325 of 2005 awarding a sum of Rs.3,34,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence is decided in favour of the appellant herein. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them by the Tribunal. The only issue to be decided is the quantum.
The widow of the deceased also breath her last during the pendency of the claim petition itself leaving behind her three minor children and her in-laws. The tribunal did not grant any amount under the head of future prospects.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has considered Rs.2,500 per month which is unjust even in the year of accident. Deceased was private service in National Rice Mill and he was 35 years of age as per postmortem report. He was survived by six dependents. It is submitted that the deduction towards personal expenses also requires to be disturbed and the amount cannot be refused for future prospects of deceased.
It is submitted that the deceased being 35 years of age at the time of accident, the multiplier of 16 granted by the Tribunal requires to be enhanced.
It is submitted by Sri V.C. Dixit, learned counsel for the respondents that the income which has not been proved cannot be more than what has been assessed by the Tribunal. He could not point out that the additional amount under the head of future prospects has not to be added as per the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Setthi and others, S.L.P. (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014, decided on 31.10.2017. It has not been shown by counsel for the respondent that the said amount cannot be enhanced. The amount awarded under the conventional head is also not required to be enhanced is submitted by counsel for the respondent.
After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and perusing the judgment and order impugned, this Court feels that the income of the deceased should have been Rs.3000/- per month namely Rs.36,000/- per year to which as the deceased was 35 years of age, 50% of the income requires to be added in view of the decision in Pranay Sethi (Supra) which would come to Rs.36,000 + 18,000 = 54,000/- out of which 1/4th requires to be deducted as personal expenses of the deceased and, hence, the annual datum figure available to the family is Rs.40,500/- rounded up to Rs.41,000/-. As the deceased was in the age bracket of 31-35 years, the applicable multiplier would be 16 in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121. In addition to that Rs.40,000/- is granted towards conventional heads as it is matter of 1999. Hence, the claimants are entitled to a total sum of Rs. 41,000 x 16 +40,000 = 6,96,000/-. The tribunal did not grant any amount under the head of consortium as the widow has passed away he has granted compensation of Rs.2,500/- for loss of estate, towards funeral expenses Rs.2,000/- and for loss of love and affection Rs.10,000/- enhancement is sort off.
The rate of interest will have to be enhanced and I am unable to accept the submission of Sri V.C. Dixit, learned counsel for the respondent that the Rules will apply. A Division Bench of Lucknow Bench in F.A.F.O. No. 199 of 2017 (National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lavkush and another) decided on 21.3.2017 have interpreted the Rules, which has been followed by this Court time and again, will enure for the benefit of the appellant and, therefore the rate of interest would be 9% as held in catena of decision of this High Court.
I am in agreement with counsel for the respondent that after the appeal is filed and is kept pending the rate of interest requires to be decreased.
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 amount be deposited with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition till award and 6% thereafter till the amount is deposited. The amount be deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
This Court is thankful to both the counsels to see that this very old matter is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Shubhankar