Form No. J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay FMA 1042 of 2024 Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Limited Versus Kasmira Bibi @ Kashmira Bibi & Ors. For the Appellant : Mr. Soumalya Ganguli For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mondal, Ms. Rita Bhattacharyya, Mr. Sayantan Rakshit. For the Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Subhadip Paramanik, Ms. Anindita Roy. Heard & Judgment on : 5th February, 2025. Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J: 1. Both the Learned Advocates representing the appellant/Insurance Company and the respondents/claimants are present. 2. The instant appeal had been filed against the judgment and award dated 31.07.2023 passed by the Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional District Judge, Special Court, Paschim Medinipore in M.A.C. Case No. 347/2019. 2 3. An application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act had been filed by the victim/claimant being represented by his mother claiming compensation on account of being physically disabled to the extent of 100% as assessed by the Medical Board as a result of being injured in an accident which occurred on 29.04.2017 at about 4:30 P.M. when the offending vehicle being a car bearing registration no. WB34AX/4696 (Hyundai i-10) proceeded at an exceeding speed, rashly and negligently, whereby the victim was severely injured and admitted at Medinipore Medical College and Hospital and thereafter to Star Hospital, Cuttak. 4. The learned Advocate representing the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the learned Tribunal had granted the monthly income to the extent of Rs.3,700/- contrary to the claim of the victim to be Rs.3,000/- per month. It was further submitted that the multiplier with regard to the age of the victim should have been “15” instead of “18”. Moreover, the learned Tribunal granted an increased rate of interest to the tune of 7% per annum instead of 6% per annum. 5. The learned Advocate representing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/claimants submitted that the learned Tribunal had rightly assessed the compensation amount considering the relevant factors and this Court should not interfere with the same. 3 6. Since the learned Advocate representing the appellant/Insurance Company did not dispute the occurrence of the accident, involvement of the offending vehicle, the driving license, insurance policy, route permit etc. and other ancillary issues, this Court restricts itself only to the extent of rectifying the element of multiplier which should have been “15” instead of “18”. The 100% disability suffered by the victim at such a tender age in view of the report of the Medical Board entitling him to a sum of Rs.3,700/- per month to be his monthly income is not interfered with. The learned Tribunal should have granted the interest to be at the rate of 6% per annum instead of 7% per annum. Considering the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court Pranay in National insurance company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Shetty & Anr1 and Sarala Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.2, the impugned award of Rs. 45,49,111/- is modified as follows: Income Annual Income Future Prospect to be added( 40%) Multiplier to be “15” Disability 100% Medical Expenses Conveyance Charge Rs. 3700/- Rs. 44,400/- Rs. 17,760/- Rs. 62,160/- X 15 ------------------ Rs. 9,32,400/- Rs. 3,30,231/- Rs. 2,00,000/- 1 2017(4)TAC 673(S.C) 2 (2009) 6 SC 121 4 Future Medical Expenses Pain & Sufferings + Loss of amenities Marriage prospect Attendant Charges Rs. 8,00,000/- Rs. 10,00,000/- Rs. 3,00,000/- Rs. 8,00,000/- Rs. 43,62,631/- 7. It was further submitted by the Learned Advocate for the appellant/insurance company that the Appellant/Insurance Company has deposited the entire awarded amount with interest of 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 59,06,344/- as per the challan filed by the learned advocate for the Appellant/Insurance company. 8. The respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants is entitled to receive the balance amount of Rs. 43,62,631/- at the rate of 6% per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of actual realization. 9. The office of the Registrar General, High Court at Calcutta is to calculate the award passed by this Court today together with interest as aforesaid and thereafter disburse the same to the present respondent No.1 and 2/claimants as mentioned in the impugned judgment dated 31.07.2023 passed by the Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional District Judge, Special Court, Paschim Medinipore in M.A.C. Case No. 5 347/2019 on proof of proper identification of the respondent No.1 and 2/claimants subject to payment of ad valorem Court fees and refund the differential amount if any through a cheque to the learned advocate for the insurance company for the accounts of the insurance company. 10. The interest generated on the sum of money deposited by the appellant/insurance company at the office of the learned Registrar General, High Court at Calcutta which has been further deposited in the nationalized bank by the office of the learned Registrar General, High Court at Calcutta is to be apportioned and the sum of interest accrued on the aforesaid amount is to be disbursed in favour of the appellant/insurance company through a cheque to be deposited at the office of the appellant/insurance company. 11. The instant appeal and connected application are disposed of accordingly. 12. The interim order if any stand vacated. 13. The TCR be sent down to the concerned tribunal forthwith. 14. Copy of the order be sent to the Department as well as the concerned tribunal as expeditiously as possible. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.) Srimanta, A.R./C.M. A.R.