Arvind Kumar Pandey And Others vs Girish Pandey And Another on 6 April, 2017

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Arvind Kumar Pandey And Others vs Girish Pandey And Another on 6 April, 2017

Bench: Servesh Kumar Gupta

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

              Appeal from Order No. 471/2013

Arvind Kumar Pandey & Others                           .... Appellants

                               Versus

Girish Pandey & Another                              .... Respondents

     Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate, for the appellants.
     Mr. I.P. Kohli, Advocate, for the respondents.

                           April 6, 2017

Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.

Having heard the rival contentions, it appears that this appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the award by the legal representatives of Smt. Sushma Pandey, who lost his life at the age of 55 years on 26.6.2006 at 3.45 PM at Nahan, situated somewhere in Himachal Pradesh. She was travelling in the bus, which skidded off and fell in a ditch causing her death.

Claim petition no. 59/2007 was instituted demanding compensation of Rs. 16,85,000/-, but the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,50,000/-, the insufficiency whereof has been challenged by the claimants appellants.

Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the income certificate of the deceased Smt. Sushma Pandey shows that during the course of her employment, she earned Rs. 13894/- and on deducting the income tax of Rs. 1424/-, she earned Rs. 12470/-. Thereafter on 31.3.2006, income of Rs. 9103/- was credited to her account and after deducting the income tax of Rs. 930, she earned Rs. 8170/-. So, in five months, she earned Rs. 20,640/-. So, it has been argued that evaluating her base income on notional basis was not proper.

I think that the argument of learned Senior Counsel is not tenable and is rejected for the simple reason that at this advance stage of life, it is somewhat peculiar that this lady will engage herself as advisor-cum-agent in Birla Sunlife Company, all the same she was living with her husband and also had a grown up son.

It has been held time and again by the Hon'ble Apex Court that in such matters, only just and proper compensation should be awarded and it cannot be calculated considering all the miniscule details in the manner as has been argued by the learned Senior Counsel of the appellants.

Further, the claimants were not dependent on the income (if any) of the deceased Smt. Sushma Pandey.

So, I think that there is no merit in this appeal. It is hereby dismissed.

(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) Prabodh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Uttarakhand High Court