Allahabad High Court
Smt. Basmati And Others vs Satyender Singh And Another on 15 November, 2019
Author: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Court No. - 33 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 3296 of 2008 Appellant :- Smt. Basmati And Others Respondent :- Satyender Singh And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Anju Shukla,Nigamendra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Nigamendra Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.K. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the judgment and order impugned.
2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 21.08.2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No. 156 of 2003 awarding a sum of Rs.6,76,716/- with interest at the rate of 6%.
3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on it by the Tribunal. The only issue to be decided is, the quantum.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased to be Rs. 4,906/- per month which is rounded to Rs.5,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Tribunal has not granted any amount towards future loss of income to the deceased which is required to be granted in view of the decision in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 0 Supreme (SC) 1050. It is further submitted that the amount under non-pecuniary heads and the interest awarded by the Tribunal are on the lower side and require enhancement.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the judgment and order impugned, this Court feels that the income of the deceased would be Rs.5,000/- per month namely Rs.60,000/- per year, to which as the deceased was 31 years of age and was a government servant, 50% of the income i.e. Rs. 30,000/- requires to be added as future income of the deceased in view of the decision in Pranay Sethi (Supra) which would bring the annul figure to Rs.60,000 + 30,000 = Rs.90,000/-. The deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased has been rightly done by the Tribunal. Hence, after deduction of 1/3rd, the annual datum figure available to the family would be Rs.60,000/-. Since there was a minor daughter of 3 years, additional sum of Rs.30,000/- will have to be granted. As the deceased was 31 years of age, 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.70,000/- is granted under the head of non-pecuniary damages in view of the decision in Pranay Sethi (Supra). Hence, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.60,000 x 16 + 70,000 + 30,000 = Rs. 10,60,000/-.
6. As far as rate of interest is concerned, 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 decisions of this High Court.
7. 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.
Order Date :- 15.11.2019 Irshad