The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ... vs Ganesh on 12 March, 2025

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ... vs Ganesh on 12 March, 2025

Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12744




                                                                 1                                      MA-70-2015
                              IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                         BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
                                                    ON THE 12 th OF MARCH, 2025
                                                     MISC. APPEAL No. 70 of 2015
                           THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. PADAWA INDORE ROAD
                                                  KHANDWA
                                                    Versus
                                              GANESH AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                             Shri S.K. Rao - Senior Advocate with Shri Vinit Pandey, Advocate for the
                           appellant.

                             Shri Anil Lal- Advocate for the respondents.

                                                                  ORDER

1. Record is received. The appeal is already admitted for hearing on 05.02.2015. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, appeal is finally heard and is disposed of as below.

2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company for reduction in amount of compensation granted vide award passed by the learned AMACT, Khandwa (for sort 'Tribunal') in Claim case MVC No. 14/2014 (Smt. Sushila Bai and others Vs. Ganesh and others) on 24.01.2013 whereby learned Tribunal, for the death of Dilip Kushwaha sone of Kadwa Kushwaha, who was aged about 30 years at the time of motor accident dated 22.12.2012 has awarded compensation of Rs.10,19,476/-.

3. It is seen that in claim No.13/2014 and No.14/2014, one claimant- Shushila Bai is common which cannot be permitted because she is grand-mother of deceased Dilip, while Geeta Bai is wife of deceased - Dilipand Ganesh and Kumkum are their children.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NIRAJ KUMAR CHOUDHARY Signing time: 28-03-2025 19:53:57

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12744 2 MA-70-2015

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that an excessive amount has been granted on ground of future prospect, which has been calculated on higher side. Learned appellant's counsel submits that higher amount has been paid on the basis of wrong calculation. He further submitted that amount of compensation so awarded by tribunal may be suitably reduced.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that awarded compensation by the Tribunal is well justified.

6. Considered the above submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned award, it is trite law that just and proper amount of compensation has to be awarded by the tribunal. Hence, lets correct calculation be again made for which appellant has come to this appeal, which would be as below:-

1 Monthly Income Rs.4945/-

2 Annual income Rs.59,340/- 3 40 % towards future prospects Rs.83,076/-

(Rs. 59,340/-+40%) 4 Considering number of dependents (1/4) Rs.20,769/-

deduction towards personal expenses (Rs.83,076/- x 1/4 ) 5 Family dependency after deduction towards Rs.62,307/-

personal living expenses (Rs. 83,076/- - Rs.20,769/-) 6 Multiplier considering age of deceased at 30 17 years 7 Compensation Rs.10,59,219/-

(Rs. 62,307/-x 17) 8 Loss of consortium Rs.1,20,000/-

(3xRs.40,000/-) 9 Towards funeral expenses + Loss of estate Rs.30,000/-

Total compensation 10 (Rs. 10,59,219/-+ Rs.1,20,000/- Rs.12,09,219 /-

+Rs.30,000/-) Signature Not Verified Signed by: NIRAJ KUMAR CHOUDHARY Signing time: 28-03-2025 19:53:57 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12744 3 MA-70-2015

7. Thus, the total compensation to which claimants are entitled is Rs.12,09,219/- Since, the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.10,19,476/--, therefore, claimant would be entitled for enhancement of compensation of Rs.1,89,743/- (Rs.12,09,219/- - Rs.10,19,476/).

8. Since, the appellant has brought to this appeal for reduction in the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, it is seen that after calculation, the compensation amount instead of reduction it got enhanced in favour of claimants.

9. After hearing learned counsel for both parties, this Court is of considered view that proper compensation has not been awarded by the tribunal, therefore this appeal which has been filed for reduction of compensation of award, on actually making compensation coming up for enhancement of Rs.1,89,743/-.

10. At this juncture learned counsel for the appellant not pressing this appeal and and submits that it may be dismissed as withdrawn.

11.Therefore, this appeal is disposed as withdrawn/not pressed.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE NRJ Signature Not Verified Signed by: NIRAJ KUMAR CHOUDHARY Signing time: 28-03-2025 19:53:57

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court