1 2025:CGHC:17831 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 835 of 2018 1. National Insurance Company Limited Hyderabad, Gandhi Nagar Bussiness Center Ground Floor, H.No. 1-1-380/19/a, Ashok Nagar, Extension Hyderabad (A.P.) Local Address- National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Meenu Complex, Kosabadi, Korba, Tahsil And District Korba, Chhattisgarh (Non- Applicant No.3). ... Appellant versus 1. Smt. Premlata Tanwar Wd/o Late Rishi Kumar Aged About 38 Years R/o Lodiyaghat, P.S. Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam- Qr. No. E-31-K-2-Vihar, H T P S Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2. Hemant Kumar S/o Late Rishi Kumar Aged About 26 Years R/o Lodiyaghat, P.S. Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam- Qr. No. E-31-K-2-Vihar, H T P S Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3. Mukesh Kumar S/o Late Rishi Kumar Aged About 24 Years R/o Lodiyaghat, P.S. Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam- Qr. No. E-31-K-2-Vihar, H T P S Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 4. Ku. Khushbu Tanwar D/o Late Rishi Kumar Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Premlata, Wd/o Late Rishi Kumar (Respondent No.1) R/o Lodiyaghat, P.S. Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam- Qr. No. E-31-K-2-Vihar, H T P S Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5. Rup Singh Tanwar S/o Late Bhavnath Singh Aged About 78 Years R/o Lodiyaghat, P.S. Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam- Qr. No. E-31-K-2-Vihar, H T P S Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh………………………………………Claimants. 6. Sajjandas S/o Shatrughn Das Aged About 29 Years R/o Limtari, P.S. Bilaigarh, District Baloudabazar, Chhattisgarh, Hall Mukam Aadarsh Nagar Kusmunda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No.1). 7. The District Health Service In Front Of Chhattisgarh Rajya Escorts, New Dental College, Rajbandha Ground, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No.2). ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 5 : Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate For Respondents 6 & 7 : None. SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.04.24 10:14:08 +0530 2 (Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. ) Order On Board 21/04/2025 1.This is an Insurer’s appeal against the award dated 10.01.2018 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katghora, District-Korba (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 86/2015, whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.82,66,285/-, from the date of application till its realization, in favour of the claimants and against the appellant Insurance Company. 2.The facts, in brief, necessary for disposal of the present appeal, are that on 15.06.2015 deceased Rishi Kumar was going from Village Gursiya to Darri on his motorcycle. When he reached near Lepara turning, respondent no.6 Sajjandas driving the offending vehicle i.e. Tata Sumo bearing registration No.CG-0205969, rashly and negligently, came from opposite direction and dashed against the motorcycle of Rishi Kumar (deceased), as a result of which, he suffered grievous injuries and died during treatment. The claimants, who are the wife and children of the deceased, preferred a claim application before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.1,11,88,380/-. Learned Claims Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence available on record, award total compensation of Rs.82,66,285/- in favour of the claimants, from the date of application till its realization. While passing the impugned award, the Tribunal has saddled the liability of payment of compensation upon the Insurance Company against which the present appeal has been filed. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for appellant/insurance company that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is bad in law. He submits that the learned Claims Tribunal wrongly assessed the income of the deceased on higher side. He further submits that the conveyance allowance and overtime allowance is not the regular income, therefore, while calculating the compensation amount the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have deducted the same from the gross income of the deceased. He also submits that the award in question is on the higher side and needs to be reduced suitably. 3 Cross-objection/Appeal 4.On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 5 i.e. the claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the learned tribunal ought to have held that the deceased was in a permanent job and therefore an additional 15% towards future prospects should have been added while calculating the annual income of the deceased. He also submits that the awarded compensation on the other heads is also on the lower side, which needs to be enhanced suitably. 5.No one appeared on behalf of respondents No. 6 and 7 in final hearing of this case. 6.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7.It was claimed that at the time of accident, deceased Rishi Kumar was aged about 52 years and he was working as Plant Assistant-2 in CSEB Hasdeo and was earning Rs.80,215/- per month from his work. Considering the evidence brought on record, the Tribunal has assessed the income of deceased at Rs.80,215 per month on the basis of salary slip Ex.P-9. During the course of arguments, both parties agreed that the annual income of the deceased should be Rs. 8,52,141/- as per the income tax return form for the assessment year 2015-16, though it has not been exhibited. Thus, considering the income tax return form for the assessment year 2015-16, and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the annual income of the deceased is taken as Rs. 8,52,141/-. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 15% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 1,27,821/-, the annual income of the deceased comes to Rs. 9,79,962/-. 8. From the annual income of the deceased, there will be statutory deduction towards income tax. The income tax slab for the financial year 2015-2016 was as follows: Income Tax Slabs in the FY 2015-16 Income Tax Rates Taxable Income Total Tax Upto 2.5 lakh nil Rs. 2,50,000/- nil 2,50,001-5 lakh 10% Rs. 2,50,000/- Rs. 25,000/- 4 5,00,001-10 lakh 20% Rs.4,79,962/- Rs. 95,992/- 10,00,001-above 30% Nil nil Total Rs. 1,20,992/- 9. In view of the same, after deduction of income tax, the annual income comes to Rs.8,58,970 (9,79,962-1,20,992). 10.The deceased was married, aged about 52 years and the claimants are the wife and children (total 5 persons) of the deceased, so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/4 of the income i.e., Rs.2,14,742/-, as has rightly been held by the Tribunal and after deduction of the same, the annual dependency comes to Rs.6,44,228/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and also considering the age of the deceased, the multiplier would be 11 as has rightly been held by the Tribunal. After applying the said multiplier, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.70,86,508/-. The claimants are also entitled for Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses. As per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for Rs.40,000/- each for love and affection totaling Rs.2,00,000/-. Thus, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs.73,16,508/- in the following manner:- Heads Calculation Compensation towards dependency 70,86,508 Towards loss of estate 15,000 Towards Loss of consortium & Love and affection to all five claimants @ Rs.40,000/- each 2,00,000 Funeral Expenses 15,000 Total compensation 73,16,508/- 5 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs.73,16,508/-. Hence, the reduction of the compensation would be Rs.9,49,777/- (82,66,285 – 73,16,508). The claimants would be entitled to get a compensation of Rs. 73,16,508/- instead of Rs. 82,66,285/-. The excess amount of compensation, if any, paid by the insurance company/appellant shall be refunded to them. 12. In the result, the appeal of insurance company is partly allowed and the cross appeal of the claimants is dismissed. Accordingly, the impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 13. Records of the Tribunal along with a copy of this order be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Sourabh P.