High CourtsSingle Bench(2017) 07 UK CK 0007

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Dhaneshwari Pande & Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 4 July 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Servesh Kumar Gupta
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
129 of 2015

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 747 words
1.

Having heard the rival contentions, it transpires that Mr. Damodar Pande, a retired employee from the Public Works Department of the State, aged about 76 years, was dashed by the motorcycle no. UA-04-A-7578. Mr. Pande fell down and got injured. He was shifted to SAI Hospital and after remaining there for two days, he was taken to Bareilly Ram Murti Hospital on 13.9.2010. Since, his hip bone had been fractured and it could not be plastered on account of the too much old age of Mr. Pande, so, he was brought again to Krishna Nursing Home, Haldwani where he breathed his last on 20.11.2010. It has been disclosed by the doctors during the course of their examination that due to extreme infirmness and old age of Mr. Pande a number of deceases developed and aggravated in his body like blood pressure, sugar and other correlated ailments and ultimately he died.

2.

The accident was reported at 24.8.2010 by Mr. Anand Ballabh Pande, son of Mr. Damodar Pande, in the concerning police station but nothing could happen towards the initiation of any penal proceedings.

3.

The accident has been accepted by the owner of the motorcycle Mr. Govardhan Dungrakoti. Although, he was not present at the spot and surprisingly Mr. Mohan Ram has produced the written statement denying any rash and negligent driving on his part.

4.

The claim petition no. 192/2011 was presented by Smt. Dhaneshwari Pande, the wife of the deceased, claiming the compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,70,000/-, (Rupees ten lakhs seventy thousand only) whereagainst the learned Tribunal has granted Rs. 4,06,910/- (Rupees four lakhs six thousand nine hundred ten only).

5.

The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that Mr. Damodar Pande died after three months of the said accident, so, his death cannot directly be linked to the injuries which he suffered in the accident occurred on 22.8.2010.

6.

This argument can partially be accepted for the reason that it is difficult to deny the factum of the accident and suffering of the injuries by Mr. Pande on account of such accident but, at the same time it must be accepted that he was of 76 years old hence, lying on the bed his ailment aggravated due to the very advance age of his life. The power of resistance had been vanished against the deceases. So, that was one of the major reasons of his death.

10.

As accounts to financial loss to his wife Smt. Dhaneshwari Pande, I feel, she has hardly suffered with any pecuniary loss in this regard because at the time of death Mr. Damodar Pande is getting Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) pension and after his death his wife Smt. Dhaneshwari Pande certainly must have been getting the family pension.

11.

The eventuality has been dealt with by the full Bench of Hon''ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt. Bhagwati Bai Anr. Vs. Bablu and Ors. Reported in AIR 2007 Madhya Pradesh 38 (GWALIOR BENCH). In that case, the claim was presented by the injured who suffered the injuries on account of the accident and after the long treatment in the hospital, he died. So, the Madhya Pradesh High Court was of the view that in such eventuality, the claim for personal injury will abate and such claim will not survive to his legal representatives except as regards the claim for pecuniary loss of the estate of claimant.

12.

The learned Trial Court after much calculations has expressed the view that only Rs. 1,04,000/- (Rupees one lakh four thousand only) was found to be proved towards the medical expenses incurred in the treatment.

13.

Therefore, I am also of the view that such amount should be granted to the family members or the dependants of the deceased because it was actually incurred in the medical treatment.

14.

Besides that, I find it appropriate to grant Rupees one lakh more to the claimant Smt. Dhaneshwari Pande on account of the death of her husband while he was touching 80 years of age because in such matters, the longevity of life should also be taken into consideration.

15.

The appeal is hereby allowed in the above terms. The award is reduced and modified to the extent of Rs. 2,04,000/- (Rupees two lakhs four thousand only) along with 6% interest from the date of presentation of the petition till it is actually made.

16.

All the pending applications also stands disposed of.

17.

LCR be sent back.