1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury F.M.A. 1425 of 2024 Aslema Bibi @ Alias Aslema Bewa & Ors. VERSUS Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited For the appellants: For the respondent/insurance company: Mr. Jayanta Banerjee, Adv. Mrs. Ruxmini Basu Roy, Adv. Mr. Argha Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Singh, Adv. Last Heard on: July 13, 2026 Judgment on: July 20, 2026 Biswaroop Chowdhury,J: The appellants before this Court were claimants in a case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and are aggrieved by the Judgment and Award dated 29-07-2024 passed by Learned District Judge Nadia in MAC Case No. 286 of 2016. The case of the claimants before the Learned Trial Court may be summed up thus:- 2 On 27-07-2014 at about 400 hours when the victim Rabiul Molla, after getting down from a bus at Krishnanagar Panthatirtha for taking tea and tiffin and thereafter while he was standing for urinating by the side of NH-34 in the twinkling of an eye the offending vehicle bearing No. WB-57B/8367 (pick up light goods vehicle) coming from Kolkata side with a very high speed most rashly and negligently, lost control and dashed the victim from behind. As a result of the same he received severe injuries on his person and he was shifted to Krishnanagar District Hospital, where he succumbed to the same. There was no fault on the part of the victim/deceased, who was standing on the left side of the road, and the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the pick up van. Pursuant to the filing of the case notice was issued upon the opposite parties opposite party vehicle owner although appeared but did not contest the case. Opposite Party Insurance Company contested the case by filing written statement. ISSUES were framed and evidence was adduced Learned Trial Judge upon considering evidence adduced and upon hearing Learned Advocates was pleased to dispose of the claim case by observing and directing as follows:- ‘Hence it is ORDERED that the instant MAC case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is allowed ex-parte against the opposite party no.1/Owner of the offending vehicle (Pickup light goods vehicle) and on contest against the opposite party no. 2/Insurance Company of the offending vehicle 3 (Pickup light goods vehicle) but in the facts and circumstances without making any order as to costs. The petitioners/claimants do hereby get an award of compensation amounting to Rs. 7,01,125/- (Rupees seven Lakh One Thousand One hundred and Twenty Five only), in total plus an amount of interest to be calculated on this amount @6% per annum from the date of filing of this case, i.e. on 14-09- 2016 till the date of actual realization of the same. The opposite party no.2/Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited is hereby directed to issue one account payee cheque amounting to Rs. 1,50,190/- (Rupees One lakh Fifty Thousand One hundred and Ninety only) in favour of the Petitioner/claimant no-1 and five account payee cheques amounting to Rs. 1,10,187/- (Rupees One Lakh Ten Thousand One hundred and Eighty seven only) each in favour of the petitioner/claimant no. 2 to 6, plus an amount of interest to be calculated on the aforesaid cheque amounts @6% per annum from 14-09-2016 till the date of such payment within sixty days from the date of this award, in default the entire amount shall carry interest @9% per annum from the date of this award till the date of actual realization of the entire amount. After receiving the cheques issued in favour of the minor petitioner/claimant nos. 2,3 and 4 being the two minor daughters and one minor son of the decesased the amount mentioned therein shall be invested by the petitioner/claimant no-1 in fixed deposit scheme in the names of the minor 4 petitioner/claimant no. 2,3 and 4 either in a nationalized bank or in a post office, till they attain majority. After furnishing of documents by the petitioner/claimant no. 1 regarding making of such investment the cheque issued in favour of the petitioner/claimant no-1 will be handed over to her. The petitioners/claimants are directed to make payment of the balance/additional court fees if not paid within a period of thirty days from the date of this award and it is made clear that only after payment of the same the instant award shall become effective.’ The appellants/claimants being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded has come up with the instant appeal. Heard Learned Advocate for the appellants/claimants and Learned Advocate for respondent no-1/Insurance Company. Perused the evidence adduced and materials on record. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the Learned Trial Judge erred in not considering the monthly income of the victim as Rs. 8,000/- Learned Advocate further submits that the Learned Trial Judge erred in not considering future prospect as 40%. Learned Advocate also submits that the compensation awarded should be enhanced. Learned Advocate for the respondent no-1/Insurance Company submits that the claimants/were unable to prove the income and occupation of the 5 victim thus the Learned Trial Judge did not commit any error in considering the monthly income as Rs. 3,300/-. Upon considering the claim petition and evidence adduced it appears that the claimants were able to establish that the victim used to work as a mason. Although the claimants were unable to prove the income but upon considering the nature of occupation, the price index and the number of family members which the victim had to maintain it is quite natural that the victim earned a monthly income which is sufficient to maintain the basic needs of himself and his family. Thus it would be reasonable to consider the monthly income as Rs. 7,000/-. In the event monthly income is considered as Rs. 7,000/-. 40% future prospect being added the total monthly income comes to Rs. 9,800/- 1/3rd deducted on account of perusal expenses net monthly income comes to Rs. 6567/-. The annual dependency loss comes to Rs. 78,804/-. The multiplier of 17 applied brings the total dependency loss to Rs. 13,39,668/-. Further the claimants are entitled to Rs. 84,000/- on account of loss of estate, funeral expenses and loss of consortium. Thus total compensation which claimants are entitled comes to Rs. 14,23,608/- by arithmetical calculation. However this Court is of the view that compensation of Rs. 14,00,000/- (Rupees fourteen lakhs) is just and reasonable. Hence this Appeal FMA No. 1425 of 2024 stands disposed Judgment and Award dated 29-07-2024 passed by Learned District Judge Nadia in MAC case 6 No. 286 of 2016 stands modified to the extent that the claimants/respondents are entitled to Rs. 14 lakh along with interest @6% p.a. from date of filing claim case till today. The respondent Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited shall deposit Rs. 14 lakh along with interest @6% p.a. before Registrar General High Court Calcutta within 8 weeks from the date of communication of this Order. In the event compensation awarded by Learned Trial Court is already paid or deposited balance amount be deposited. The claimants/respondents will be entitled to withdraw the compensation deposited upon compliance of payment of deficit court fees. Deficit Court fees be paid within 4 weeks. LCR be send back by Special Messenger cost to be deposited by Appellant within 7 days. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, should be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)