United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Sandhya Rani Das And Ors

Heard Ms. R. Purukayastha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company as well as Mr. P.S. Roy, learned counsel and Mrs. R. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants and the owner of the offending vehicle.

This is an appeal filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act challenging the judgment and award dated 02.09.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.3, West Tripura Agartala in T.S.(MAC) 19/2016 awarding Rs.11,31,200/- in favour of the claimants along with interest @ 9 % per annum.

The brief facts are that, the respondents No.1 and 2 being the claimants (hereinafter referred to as claimants) had lodged a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act stating inter alia that on 08.11.2015 at about 12.30 P.M(noon), the deceased-Hemlal Das who was the husband of the respondent No.1 and father of the respondent No.2 was proceeding towards Harerkhola by riding a bicycle on Kamalpur-Ambassa road. When he reached at Harerkhola near a Bike mechanical shop, at that time one motor bike bearing No.AS-24A-6842 coming with high speed and in rash and negligent manner dashed the victim and another and as a result they fell down and suffered grievous injuries on their persons. They were shifted to GBP Hospital where said Hemlal Das succumbed to his injuries. The claimants claimed Rs.22,70,000/- as compensation due to the death of victim-Hemlal Das in the said Road Traffic Accident. In the claim application, the claimants had impleaded the owner of the bike bearing No.AS-24A-6842 along with the Insurance Company. After receipt of the summons both the owner of the motor bike and the Insurance Company, the appellant herein submitted written statement and contested the suit. In course of proceeding, the learned Tribunal had framed issues and on the basis of the issues, the parties had laid their respective evidence. It is pertinent to mention that the appellant-Insurance Company did not adduce evidence in course of proceeding challenging the claim of the claimants. After taking into consideration the evidence and the materials brought on record, the learned Tribunal had delivered judgment awarding Rs.11,31,200/- to the claimants.

Being aggrieved of the said quantum of compensation, the appellant-Insurance Company has preferred the instant appeal.

Ms. Purukayastha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company has submitted that the learned Tribunal failed to consider the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- per month. Learned counsel pointed out that the learned Tribunal had deviated from the parameters while awarding the compensation under the head of Loss of Love and Affection to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- and for the Loss of Care and Guidance at Rs.50,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant has emphasised that in pursuance to the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and ors., dated 31.10.2017, the Apex Court has prescribed Rs.70,000/- under the conventional heads. As such, the award being deviated under the conventional heads requires interference by this Court.

Ms. R. Purukayastha, learned counsel has further submitted that in the claim application, the age of the deceased was mentioned as 60 years and even in the examination-in-chief, the P.W.-1, i.e., the respondent No.1 had claimed the age of the deceased as 60 years. In the claim application, the claimants had stated the age of the deceased as 60 years but the Learned Tribunal had not considered the said statement of the claimants. Ms. Purukayastha, learned counsel has further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought not to have taken into consideration the Xerox copy of the PRTC where the age of the deceased has been mentioned as 52 years.

On the other hand, Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the claimants has defended the award passed by the learned Tribunal. He has submitted that at the time of adducing evidence, the claimant-respondent No.1 has categorically stated the age of the deceased was 52 years at the time of the death. The learned counsel has further submitted that a Xerox copy of the PRTC of the deceased was submitted at the time of adducing evidence. The learned Tribunal admitted the Xerox copy after comparing the same with the original copy of the PRTC, where the age of the deceased was mentioned as 52 years.

Mr. Roy, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Magna General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Ors., decided on 18th September 2018, wherein the Apex Court has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees 50,000/- each) for the Loss of Love and Affection. Mr. Roy, learned counsel has further submitted that the deceased-Hemlal Das used to take sufficient care upon the claimants. The deceased always used to substantially guide the claimants in their day to day life. But due to his death, the claimants have lost their guardian and there is none to take care and guide them properly. As such, the learned counsel has defended the award passed by learned Tribunal against the head of Care and Guidance to the tune of Rs.50,000/-

I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. I also have perused the evidence on record and the judgment passed by the learned Tribunal. In the case of Magna General Insurance Company (Supra), the Supreme Court has awarded Rs.50,000/- each to the claimants against the head 'Loss of Love and Affection'. It is equally true that due to the death of Hemlal Das, there is none in the family to take proper care and guide of the claimants. The Insurance Company did not adduce any evidence for taking a contrary view of the claim of the claimants.

For the reasons stated above, I find no merit in the instant appeal and, accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, the Insurance Company shall pay interest @ 6% per annum instead of 9% per annum.