Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Kavita Gupta vs Satish Kumar . on 28 October, 2015
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice, Arun Mishra
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9001 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP(C) No.1230 of 2015)
KAVITA GUPTA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SATISH KUMAR & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Shri S.L. Gupta, learned counsel, who is present in Court and appears for the Insurance Company is directed to accept notice on behalf of the Insurance Company, in this matter.
2. Leave granted.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in F.A.O. No.1149 of 2005, dated 22.02.2014.
4. Signature Not Verified
The appellants/claimants are the family Digitally signed by NEETU KHAJURIA 18:30:35 IST Reason: members of the deceased, who met with an accident and Date: 2015.11.06 2 succumbed to his injuries. On the claim made by the claimants, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (for short, “the Tribunal”) had computed the compensation amounting to Rs.3,84,000/-, out of which 50% was deducted for contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and thereby awarded compensation amounting to Rs.2,01,500/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.
5. Being aggrieved by the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants/claimants preferred an appeal before the High Court for enhancement of the compensation. The High Court, by its impugned judgment and order, while enhancing the compensation under some heads has also ordered deduction of 25% towards contributory negligence.
6. Aggrieved by the judgment and order so passed by the High Court the appellants/claimants are before us.
3
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
8. After carefully going through the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Tribunal as well as the High Court and keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to further enhance the compensation and that too without making any deductions under any of the heads.
9. Accordingly, while allowing the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants, we enhance the compensation by Rs.3,00,000/-, over and above the award so passed by the Tribunal and enhanced by the High Court, and that too without any deduction under any of the heads, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, on the enhanced amount from the date of the order passed by the High Court.
4
10. Insurance Company is directed to settle the professional fees of Shri S.L. Gupta, learned counsel, at the earliest.
11. The Civil Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
.............CJI.
(H.L. DATTU) ...............J. (ARUN MISHRA) NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 28, 2015.
5
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9090 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.1095 of 2015) SANTOSH GUPTA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SATISH KUMAR & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Shri S.L. Gupta, learned counsel, who is present in Court and appears for the Insurance Company is directed to accept notice on behalf of the Insurance Company, in this matter.
2. Leave granted.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in F.A.O. No.1150 of 2005, dated 22.02.2014.
4. The appellants/claimants are the family members of the deceased, who met with an accident and 6 succumbed to his injuries. On the claim made by the claimants, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (for short, “the Tribunal”) had computed the compensation amounting to Rs.1,29,000/-, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. while applying the multiplier of 8, keeping in view the age of the deceased as 55 years.
5. Being aggrieved by the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants/claimants preferred an appeal before the High Court for enhancement of the compensation. The High Court, by its impugned judgment and order has observed that the multiplier of 8 has been wrongly applied and it should be 11. The High Court has also enhanced the amount of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal under different heads.
6. Aggrieved by the judgment and order so passed by the High Court the appellants/claimants are before us.
7
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
8. After carefully going through the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Tribunal as well as the High Court and keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to further enhance the compensation by Rs.3,00,000/-.
9. Accordingly, while allowing the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants, we enhance the compensation by Rs.3,00,000/-, over and above the award so passed by the Tribunal and enhanced by the High Court, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, on the enhanced amount from the date of the order passed by the High Court.
10. Insurance Company is directed to settle the professional fees of Shri S.L. Gupta, learned counsel, at the earliest.
8
11. The Civil Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
.............CJI.
(H.L. DATTU) ...............J. (ARUN MISHRA) NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 28, 2015.
9
ITEM NO.66 COURT NO.1 SECTION IVB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 1230/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22/04/2014 in FAO No. 1149/2005 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh) KAVITA GUPTA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SATISH KUMAR & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 1095/2015 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in refiling SLP and Office Report) Date : 28/10/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Mittal,Adv.
Mr. Surender Singh,Adv. Ms. Usha Nandini. V,Adv. Mr. S. K. Sabharwal,Adv. (NP) For Respondent(s) Mr S.L. Gupta,Adv.
Mr. Varinder Kr. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The civil appeals are disposed of in 10 terms of the signed orders.
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed. of.
(Neetu Khajuria) (Vinod Kulvi)
Sr.P.A. Assistant Registrar
(Two signed orders are placed on the file.)