1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay FMAT (MV) 2 of 2024 Smt. Rekha Jasu -Vs- Sriram General Insurance Company Limited & Anr. For the Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Krishanu Banik For the Respondent no.1/ Insurance Company : Mr. Rajesh Singh Heard and Judgment on : 07/05/2025 Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.:- 1. The instant appeal was heard earlier and judgment was reserved. However, the matter was listed under the heading “For Hearing” for further clarification. 2. The learned advocates representing both the parties are present. 3. The claimant filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Paschim Medinipur & Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track 3rd Court, Sadar, Paschim Medinipur on 04.04.2018, praying for compensation of Rs. 9,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by Khagen and Khokan Jasu (hereinafter referred to as “the victim”) in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 12.02.2018 at around 05:30 hrs. 2 4. The accident took place when the victim was travelling from his residence to Medinipur by riding a motorcycle along the extreme left side of NH-60 road, and upon reaching near Kalaichandi Bridge, a truck bearing Registration No. WB-29A/1167 (hereinafter referred to as “the offending vehicle”) came from the opposite direction at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed into the motorcycle. As a result, the victim sustained serious injuries and was first shifted to Medinipur Medical College and Hospital (MMCH), from where he was referred to NRS/SSKM Hospital, Kolkata. However, due to non-availability of a bed, the victim was admitted to Peerless Hospital and Research Centre Limited and subsequently to Kalinga Hospital Limited, Cuttack, Odisha, where a major surgery was performed. 5. It was submitted that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. A criminal case was also registered over the incident as Salboni P.S. Case No. 36/18 dated 21.02.2018 under Sections 279/338/427 of the Indian Penal Code against the driver. The victim, who was employed as a bus conductor earning Rs. 7,500/- per month, became completely disabled and bedridden as a result of the accident. It was further submitted that more than Rs. 3,50,000/- had already been spent on his treatment. 6. The owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the case and the case proceeded ex parte against him. 7. The respondents, Shriram General Insurance contested the aforesaid MAC case. 8. The Learned Tribunal as aforesaid disposed of the issues framed considering the oral as well as documentary evidence and awarded a sum of Rs. 3 2,90,000/- as well as an interest of 6% from the date of filing the case till the realization of the amount. 9. The Learned Advocate representing the Respondent No.1/Insurance Company submitted that the victim did not suffer any permanent disability. There was only locomotive incapacitation. The victim did not suffer any loss of income. The victim could not prove his monthly income to be Rs.7,500/- per month. However, the Learned Tribunal had granted loss of income for four month to the tune of Rs.20,000/-, which was excessive. 10. The Learned Advocate representing the Appellant/Claimant submitted that the Learned Tribunal did not consider the disability of the victim to the extent of 70%, as assessed by the Medical Board to the document marked as Exhibit-7. Moreover, the multiplier method was not applied. It was further submitted that the Learned Advocate representing the Respondent No.1/Insurance Company did not file Cross-Objection, however, has raised the issues before the Court. 11. Heard the submission of the learned advocates representing the respective parties. 12. Since the occurrence of the accident, the driving license, the Insurance policy, the route permit etc. and other ancillary issues have not been disputed by the learned advocate representing the respondent No.1/insurance company, this Court restricts itself only to the extent as agitated by the Learned Advocates representing the both the parties. The PW 1, the wife of the victim stated in her examination-in-chief that her husband could not perform any professional work as he becomes disabled. Her statement in examination-in-chief was not controverted through cross- 4 examination. The accident occurred in the year 2018 and the victim worked as a conductor of a Bus. Considering the fiscal index pertaining to the year 2018, the monthly income of the victim could have been Rs.6,000/- per month and the same would not have been improbable. 13. Considering the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in National insurance company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Shetty & Anr1 and Sarala Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.2 The impugned award of Rs. 2,90,000/- is modified as follows: Monthly Income Annual Income Future Prospect to be added( 25%) Multiplier as per age of 14 (Rs.90,000/- X 14) Medical Bill Non-pecuniary damages (Pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life, loss of normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened, inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life) Less award Entitlement Rs. 6,000/- x 12 Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 18,000/- Rs. 90,000/- Rs. 12,60,000/- Rs. 2,59,111/- Rs. 4,00,000/- Rs. 20,09,111/- Rs. 2,90,000/- ________________ Rs.17,19,111/- 1 1 2017(4)TAC 673(S.C) 2 (2009) 6 SC 121 5 14. The Appellant/Claimant has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 2,90,000/- from the learned Tribunal. The Appellant/Claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.17,19,111/- along with 6% interest per annum to be paid from the date of filing of the application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act till the date of its realization. 15. The Learned Advocate for the Respondent No.1/Insurance Company is to deposit the balance sum of Rs. 17,19,111/- by cheque along with interest at the rate of 6% per cent interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim application before the office of the learned Registrar General, High Court Calcutta within six weeks from the date of passing of this order. 16. The office of the Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta shall encash the said cheque and, thereafter, disburse the same to the present Appellant/Claimant, as mentioned in the award passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Paschim Medinipur & Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track 3rd Court, Sadar, Paschim Medinipur in M.A.C. Case No.186 of 2018 on proof of proper identification of the Appellant/Claimant subject to payment of ad valorem Court's fees within six weeks. 17. The instant appeal is disposed of accordingly. 18. The Trial Court Records shall be sent down to the concerned tribunal forthwith. 19. Copy of the order be sent to the Department as well as concerned tribunal for information. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.) 6 S.R. (A.R.C.)