Madhya Pradesh High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited vs Mangal Singh on 19 September, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 19 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
MISC. APPEAL No. 469 of 2012
BETWEEN:-
BALRAM VISHWAKARMA S/O GAYA PRASAD @ RAM
PRASAD VISHWAKARMA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, VILL
GENHURAS P.S. AND TAH JAISINAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI VIKAS JYOTISHI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. MANGAL SINGH S/O DARYAB SINGH THAKUR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, VILL GEHURAS P.S. TAH
JAISINAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. BHARAT SINGH S/O DARYAB SINGH THAKUR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, VILLAGE GEHURAS P.S.
TAHSIL JAISINAGAR SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMP.LIMITED
KATRA BAZAR, SAGAR TAHSIL & DISTT. SAGAR,
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SATISH SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 1
AND 2)
(SHRI DINESH KOSHAL - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 3)
MISC. APPEAL No. 4849 of 2011
BETWEEN:-
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
KATARA BAZAR SAGAR DISTT. SGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
Signature Not Verified
(BY SHRI SHREYAS PANDIT - ADVOCATE)
Signed by: VAIBHAV
YEOLEKAR
Signing time: 20-09-2023
11:09:44
2
AND
1. MANGAL SINGH S/O DARYAB SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, VILL. GEHURAS PS.
JAISINGNAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. BHARAT SINGH S/O DARYAB SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 35 YEARS, VILLAGE GEHURAS, POLICE
STATION,TEHSIL JAISINAGAR, SAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. BALRAM VISHWAKARMA S/O RAMPRASAD
VISHWAKARMA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
VILLAGE GEHURAS, POLICE STATION,TEHSIL
JAISINAGAR, SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SATISH SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 1
AND 2)
(SHRI VIKAS JYOTISHI - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 3)
These appeals coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
These appeals are filed by the Insurance Company and the claimants respectively being aggrieved of the award dated 4/11/2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sagar in Claim Case No. 100/2011.
As far as appeal filed by the Insurance Company is concerned, the sole ground which is taken is that injured was travelling on the bonnet of the tractor which is not meant for sitting of a passenger and, therefore, the Insurance Company should be exonerated and the award should be passed against the owner and driver of the tractor.
Reliance is placed on the judgment of this court dated 26th September, 2022 passed in M.A. No. 2120/2003 wherein placing reliance on the earlier decision in M.A. No. 588/2004 (National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Ram Murti Bai and others) decided on 6/03/2019, this court has held Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 20-09-2023 11:09:44 3 that the tractor is not a passenger vehicle and nobody is permitted to sit on the mudguard of the Tractor and accordingly decided that the Insurance Company cannot be fastened with the liability to satisfy the award of a passenger who was travelling on the bonnet.
Shri Satish Shrivastava, on the other hand, opposes the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company deserves to be allowed and is allowed.
Since, the appeal of the Insurance Company is allowed, it is directed that the claimant will be entitled to recover the amount from the owner and driver of the offending Tractor.
As far as appeal of the claimant is concerned, it is submitted by Shri Vikas Jyotishi that the Tribunal considered notional income of the claimant at Rs. 2,000/- per month for an accident which took place on 10/06/2009 and taking 50% disability has awarded meager amount under the head of loss of earning capacity. It is submitted that one of the legs of the deceased was amputate.
On the date of the accident, the minimum wages even for an unskilled labourer were to the tune of Rs. 3,520/- per month or Rs. 42,240/- per annum. The Tribunal has considered 50% disability, then loss of earning capacity comes out to Rs. 21,120/-.
The Tribunal has considered age of the injured at 40 years. Therefore, 25% is to be added towards the future prospects and then when multiplier of 15 as is applicable for a person upto the age of 40 years is applied, then total compensation under the head of loss of earning capacity will come out to Rs. 3,96,000/- in place of Rs. 1,20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
Thus, there will be an enhancement to the tune of Rs. 2,76,000/- under Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 20-09-2023 11:09:44 4 the head of loss of earning capacity. Besides this, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 10,000/- under the head of attendant, transport and nutritious diet. Looking to the nature of the injury, this amount is enhanced to Rs. 18,000/- under the head of attendant @ Rs. 3,000/- per month for a period of six months. Similar amount of Rs. 18,000/- will be payable under the head of nutritious diet @ Rs. 3,000/- per month for a period of six months and another sum of Rs. 5,000/- under the head of transport.
Thus, in place of Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 41,000/- will be payable under the head of attendant, nutritious diet and transport. Thus, there will be addition of Rs. 31,000/- under these heads taking total addition to Rs. 3,07,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seven thousand only).
This additional amount shall earn interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.
The other terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact. In above terms, the appeals are disposed of.
Record of the Tribunal be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 20-09-2023 11:09:44