Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

State Of U P And Another vs Smt Mukesh Devi And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 September, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 34
(1) FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 1160 of 2011 Appellant :- State of U.P. and another Respondent :- Smt. Mukesh Devi and others Counsel for Appellant :- V.C. Dixit, S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- S.D.Ojha Along with
(2) CROSS APPEAL NO. 231036 of 2014
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard learned Standing Counsel under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C. for State and Sri S.D. Ojha, learned counel appearing for claimants.
2. This Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1988”) as also Cross Appeal, both have been filed challenging the judgment and award dated 08.03.2011 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Meerut in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 416 of 2008 whereby compensation of Rs. 11,82,748/- has been awarded to claimants along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of presentation of petition till actual payment is made.
3. On behalf of appellant in Appeal No. (1160) of 2011, it is contended that multiplier has wrongly been applied since the age of victim was 39 years but multiplier of 16 has been applied, though as per judgment in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 ACJ 1298 it should be 15.
4. In the Cross Appeal filed on behalf of claimants-respondents, it is contended that future prospects have not been added and as per Supreme Court's judgment in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others AIR 2017 SC 5157 it should be 50 per cent and secondly non pecuniary loss, as per aforesaid judgment should have been 70,000/-, but only 9,500/- has been awarded.
5. I find force in both the submissions. Considering the exposition of law laid down in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (supra) the appeal of State is partly allowed to the extent that multiplier of 15 shall be applied. Applying it to the annual income taken by Tribunal, i.e., Rs. 73,328/-, the amount comes to Rs. 10,99,920/-.
6. Further, Considering the exposition of law laid down in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others (supra) the Cross Appeal of claimants is also partly allowed to the extent that towards future prospects, 50 per cent amount, i.e, Rs. 5,49,960/- shall be added to the aforesaid amount of Rs. Rs. 10,99,920/- and further towards loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses claimants would be entitled to Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. Total amount payable as compensation in this way comes to 10,99,920 + 5,49,960 + 15,000 + 40,000 + 15,000 = Rs. 17,19,880/-.
7. Judgment and award dated 08.03.2011 stands modified to the extent that compensation of Rs. 17,19,880/- shall be awarded to claimants. With respect to rate of interest and other conditions, judgment of Tribunal shall remain in tact. No costs.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 PS
Court No. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 1160 of 2011 Appellant :- State of U.P. and another Respondent :- Smt. Mukesh Devi and others Counsel for Appellant :- V.C. Dixit, S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- S.D.Ojha
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
C.M. Delay Condonation Application No. 221756 of 2011:
1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal.
2. Heard.
3. Cause shown is sufficient.
4. Delay in filing appeal is hereby condoned.
5. This application, accordingly, stands allowed.
6. Let appeal be registered with regular number and old number shall also continue to be shown in bracket for finding out details of case, whenever required by parties with reference to either of the two number.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 PS
Court No. - 34
Cross Appeal No. 231036 of 2014 In Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 1160 of 2011 Appellant :- State of U.P. and another Respondent :- Smt. Mukesh Devi and others Counsel for Appellant :- V.C. Dixit, S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- S.D.Ojha
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Partly allowed.
2. See order of date passed in First Appeal From Order (Def.) No. 1160 of 2011.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 PS
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

State Of U P And Another vs Smt Mukesh Devi And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 September, 2019
Judges
  • Sudhir Agarwal
Advocates
  • V C Dixit S C