Jharkhand High Court
Chameli Devi & Ors vs Jivrail Mian & Ors on 7 February, 2017
Author: Amitav K. Gupta
Bench: Amitav K.Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No.251 of 2010
----
1. Chameli Devi, wife of late Parmeshwar Mandal
2. Sarita Kumari,D/o late Parmeshwar Mandal
3. Bimala Kumari D/o late Parmeshwar Mandal
4. Pintu Kumar,S/o late Parmeshwar Mandal
5. Jitendra Kumar,S/o late Parmeshwar Mandal
6. Smt. Parni Devi,wife of Sri Mangi Mandal
All resident of Village Kathwara,P.S.Hirodih,P.O.Remba,District-
Giridih.
....Appellants.
Versus
1. Jivrail Mian,S/o Mr.Ghupal Mian, r/o village Bholapur,P.O.P.S.
Hirodih, District-Giridih.
2. Yusuf Ansari,s/o Sibarati Miykan.r/o village Nimapahari, P.S.P.O.
Hirodih, District-Giridih.
3. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Dhanbad Branch, Katras
Road,P.O.P.S.Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad.
.... Respondents.
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AMITAV K.GUPTA
--
For the Appellants : Mr. A.K.Lall, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.3 : Mr. Basav Chatterjee, Advocate
----
09/07.02.2017The present appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the compensation amount of Rs.3,54,000/-, awarded by the Presiding Officer, M.V.A.C.T, Giridih, in Claim case no.05/2002.
2. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants, while assailing the impugned judgment/award, has submitted that the court below has failed to appreciate that the deceased was a carpenter and the witnesses have categorically stated that he was earning Rs.200/- per day but the court below has assessed the income of the deceased on the basis of notional annual income at Rs.15,000/- . That the court below has awarded a meager amount of Rs.2000/-, Rs.2500/- and Rs.5000/- under the conventional head of funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium respectively. That the court below has applied multiplier of 16 whereas the multiplier of 17 is applicable as mentioned in Schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. On the above groundd, prayer has been made for enhancement of the compensation amount.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/New India Assurance Co. Ltd., while supporting the impugned judgment has argued that no chit of paper or document was produced by the claimants in support of their claim that the deceased was earning Rs.200/- per day or was running a carpentry shop.
2.That the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased by taking into consideration the annual notional income of Rs.15,000/- . That the court below has also directed for payment of Rs.1,25,000/-, 50,000/- and 10,000/- towards medical expenses,mental agony and transportation charges respectively.
4. Heard. It is not disputed that the deceased had been taken for treatment to a good hospital in Delhi which is indicative of the fact that the deceased had sufficient income hence, the Tribunal should have assessed the income of the deceased at least by estimating his income at Rs.3000/- p.m. and added 30% towards future prospects i.e. at Rs.3,900/-p.m. That the deceased is survived by six dependents hence, 1/5 th should have been deducted whereas the Tribunal has deducted 1/3 rd of the income. The Tribunal has awarded a paltry sum towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium. Thus, in the attending facts and circumstances it is deemed just and proper to direct the respondent/New India Assurance Co. Ltd. to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.5.25 lakhs(Rupees Five lakhs twenty five thousand), over and above the awarded compensation less the amount already paid. At this stage learned counsel for the respondent/New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has submitted that they have satisfied the award. In view of the submission of the respondent, they shall pay the outstanding amount by cheque drawn in the name of the claimants to be deposited with the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Nyay Sadan, Ranchi on or before 11.02.2017. The amount shall be disbursed on proper identification to the claimants and it shall be apportioned amongst the claimants as enumerated in the judgment/award of the court below.
5. With the aforesaid direction, the impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent as indicated above, accordingly, the appeal is, hereby, disposed off.
6. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the learned counsel of the respondent/New India Assurance Company Ltd., for needful compliance.
(Amitav K. Gupta,J) Biswas