Patna High Court
Rubi Khatoon And Ors vs Muna Prasad And Anr on 6 May, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.987 of 2016
======================================================
1. Rubi Khatoon and Ors W/o Late Md. Hussain
2. Ashraf S/o Late Hussain
3. Arshaf S/o Late Hussain
4. Sajia D/o Late Hussain All Residents of Mohalla- Dullighat, P.S. Khajekaln,
District- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Muna Prasad and Anr S/o Sri Shnkar Prasad resident of Chauhatti gali
Gurhtt, Patn City, P.s.- Khajeklan, District- Patna
2. Divisional Manager D.O.-1 The United India Insurance CO. Ltd. Laxmi
Aaprtment, Fraer Road, Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Alok Kumar @ Alok Kr Shahi, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashok Priyadarshi, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
CAV JUDGMENT
Date: 06-05-2025
Heard Mr. Alok Kumar @ Alok Kumar Shahi the
learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Ashok
Priyadarshi the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred
to as "Act") on behalf of appellants for enhancing the
compensation amount awarded to the appellants/claimants by the
learned Additional District Judge-I cum-Motor Accident Claim
Tribunal, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "learned Tribunal") in
Claim Case No. 499 of 2008 vide judgment dated 05.04.2016
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
2/10
and award dated on 09.05.2016.
3. The learned Tribunal held that the appellants
are entitled to receive Rs. 5,85,500/- as compensation and
accordingly the United India Insurance Company/ respondent no.
2 has been directed to make payment of the compensation
amount as per the order forthwith, along with simple interest 6%
interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition
within a month from the receipt of the judgment of the learned
Tribunal.
4. The details of the calculation of compensation
amount made by the learned Tribunal are as under:
Sr. Heads Calculation Net amount
no.
1. Monthly Income Rs. 4,000/
2. Annual Income Rs. 48,000/-
3. Deceased aged Rs. 48,000 x 18 Rs.
about 30 years 8,64,000/-
Multiplier of 18 is
applicable
4. 1/3rd deduction 1/3rd x Rs. Rs.
towards personal 8,64,000 2,88,000/-
and living expenses
5. Loss of estate Rs. 2,500/-
6. Loss of Consortium Rs. 5,000/-
7. Funeral Expenses Rs. 2,000/-
Total Rs.
compensation 5,85,500/-
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
3/10
5. The brief facts of this case are that Md.
Hussain/deceased did not returned his home from duty on
10.08.2008
and the family members thought that he might be on
duty and he will return on next day. The relative of the deceased
was informant by Athmalgola Police that a dead body was found
near village neura road On getting this information the relatives
of the deceased identified the dead body. The deceased was
driver of Bajaj Auto Rickshaw BR-IN-8922. In course of driving
the said rickshaw he was abducted by some miscreants and
murdered. The deceased used to earn Rs. 4,000/- from driving the
auto rickshaw. The deceased was aged about 30 years. On the
basis of the fardbeyan of one Md. Shakil Athmalgola PS Case
No. 99 of 2008 dated 11.08.2008 under Sections 302 and 201 of
the IPC and Section 27 Arms Act was registered against
unknown accused.
6. It has been argued by the counsel of the
claimants that the deceased was killed by unknown miscreants
while driving his auto rickshaw, so his death will cover as
accident under the Motor Vehicle Act. He further argued that the
offending auto rickshaw was insured with Opposite Party No. 2
the United India Insurance Company Ltd., Laxmi Apartment,
Frazer Road, Patna and the policy was valid on the date and time
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
4/10
of the occurrence, so Opposite Party No.2 is liable to pay
compensation amount to the claimant Opposite Party No.1 was
the owner of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. BR-
IN-8922 appeared in this case and Written Submission was filed
on his behalf in which it has been stated that the deceased was
murdered by some unknown criminals during course of his
employment as driver on 11.08.2008. The claimants have not
filed any certificate of legal heir of the deceased issued by
competent authority. The auto rickshaw was insured with
Opposite Party No.2 and policy was valid and effective on the
date of accident, so whole liability to pay compensation goes to
Opposite Party No.2.
7. Opposite Party No.2 United India Insurance
Company Ltd also appeared in this case and Written Statement
was filed on its behalf in which it has been stated that from
perusal of F.I.R of the accident it appears that this is case of
murder and not accident under the M.V. Act as such this claim
case under the M.V. Act is not maintainable. The deceased Md.
Hussain was not having valid and effective driving license to
drive auto rickshaw at the time of accident which is breach of
terms and condition of insurance policy, so this opposite party
no. 2 is not liable to pay compensation to the claimants. There is
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
5/10
no proof regarding the income and age of the deceased as such
the entire claim case is imaginary and that the age and income of
the deceased is denied by the Opposite Party.
8. On the basis of pleading and submissions
advanced on behalf of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed
the following issues:
i. Whether the claim case as framed is
maintainable?
ii. Whether the deceased Md. Hussain died
in an accident arising out of the use of
Motor vehicle and it comes within the
preview of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988?
iii. Whether the auto rickshaw No. BR-IN-
8922 was insured with O.P. No.2 i.e. United
India Insurance Co. Ltd on the alleged date
and time of the accident?
iv. Whether the murder or assassination will
come under the purview of the Insurance
Act?
v. Whether the driving license of the driver
was valid and effective at the time of
accident?
vi. Whether the vehicle has a valid permit at
the time of accident?
vii. Whether there have been breach of
specified condition of the policy and what
will be the proper compensation and who
will pay the same?
9. The claimants in support of its case have
altogether examined two witnesses. They have also filed certified
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
6/10
copy of FIR and charge-sheet of Athmalgola P.S. Case No. 99 of
2008 which has been marked Ext. I and 2 respectively.
Postmortem report of the deceased has been marked Ext. X for
identification.
10. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that
two witnesses i.e Rubi Khatoon and Md. Shakil on behalf of the
claimants were examined by the Tribunal. All witnesses
supported appellants claim. That the Learned Tribunal ought to
had allowed the benefit of future prospect as age of deceased was
30 years only and he was self earning person and the learned
tribunal wrongly deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses,
correct deduction will be 1/4th as the total number of claimants
are four. He also submitted that the learned Tribunal failed to
award compensation toward loss of love and affection and also
awarded very less amount toward Loss of Consortium, loss of
Estate and funeral expenses. The learned Tribunal ought to have
awarded 12% interest instead of 6% interest from the date of
filing of the claim petition up to the date of payment.
11. Learned Counsel further submitted that the
impugned Order is bad in law as well as on facts. The order
passed by the learned tribunal below is against the settled
principles for the grant of compensation in the cases of Motor
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
7/10
Accidents. The learned claims tribunal has not appreciated the
evidences and documents on record in right prospective.
12. Learned counsel for respondents has not
raised any objection and agreed to the point that future prospect
should be allowed to the claimants.
13 In the present case, the occurrence of the
accident and liability of the Insurance Company is not in dispute.
The only issue to be decided before this court is whether the
appellants/claimants are entitled for enhancement of
compensation and if so, to what extent?
14. The term compensation is a comprehensive
term which includes a claim for the damages. The claimant in a
claim for award of compensation under Section 166 of the Act, is
entitled for just compensation which has to be equitable and fair.
The loss of life and limb can never be compensated in an equal
measure but the Act is a social piece of legislation with object to
facilitate the claimants to get redress the loss of the member of
family, compensate the loss in some measure and compensate the
claimants to a reasonable extent.
15. The learned tribunal held that the age of
deceased was 30 years at the time of his death accordingly in
view of National Insurance Co. v. Pranay Seti & Ors reported
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
8/10
in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Sarla Verma and Ors v. Delhi
Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121
the multiplier applicable according to his age range (26 to 30) of
deceased would be 17. With respect to future prospect, 40% of
monthly income of deceased was added in his income and
deduction of 1/4th of his actual income has been taken. There is
no dispute in this regard on behalf of the parties. It is now well-
settled and not disputed that loss of consortium would be
awarded to each claimants.
16. In so far as conventional damage of claimants
are concerned, the learned Tribunal has awarded loss of estate
Rs. 2,500/-, funeral expenses Rs. 2,000/- and loss of consortium
Rs. 5,000/- which is not a just compensation and required to be
enhanced. The deceased left behind his wife and three children
among them two are minor as his dependents. On the basis of
judgments delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay
Sethi (supra) Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram
reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, United India Insurance
Company Ltd. v. Satindar Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and Ors.
reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780 and Rojline Nayak and Ors. Ajit
Sahoo and Ors. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1901, the
following amounts are awarded as compensation under the
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
9/10
conventional head:
Sr. Heads Calculation Compensation
no. Amount
1. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,150/-
+ Enhance
10% twice
2. Loss of Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 1,93,600/-
Consortium + Enhance (Rs. 48,400/- x
10% twice 4)
3. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,150/-
Enhance
10% twice
17. As the deceased was of 30 years (i.e. below 40
years) and was having fixed salary at the time of accident and it
was not established that he was a permanent employee, hence,
future prospects to the tune of 40% must be paid as in accordance
with para 59.4 of Pranay Sethi (supra).
18. Thus the total amount of compensation
payable will be as follows:
Sr. Heads Compensation
no. Awarded
1. Annual Income Rs. 48,000/-
2. Addition of 40% towards Rs. 67,200/-
future prospects
3. 1/ 1/4th deduction towards Rs. 16,800/-
personal and living expenses
4. Annual Income after Rs. 50,400/-
deduction
Patna High Court MA No.987 of 2016 dt.06-05-2025
10/10
5. Multiplier 17
6. Loss of Dependency Rs. 50,400 * 17 =
Rs. 8,56,800
7. Loss of estate Rs. 18,150
8. Loss of Consortium Rs. 1,93,600
9. Funeral Expenses Rs.18,150
10. Total Compensation Rs. 10,86,700
19. The Judgment/Award dated 05.04.2016 passed
by the learned Tribunal stands modified to the aforesaid extent
with 6% interest only from the date of the filing of the claim
petition. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with the
aforesaid modification in the impugned Judgment and award.
20. Pending applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of.
21. Office is directed to send back the trial court
records and proceedings along with a copy of this judgment to
the trial court, forthwith, for necessary compliance, if any.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
sunnykr/-
AFR/NAFR AFR CAV DATE 01.05.2025 Uploading Date 06.05.2025 Transmission Date 06.05.2025
[ad_1]
Source link