1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay F.M.A.T (MV) 534 of 2023 Oriental Insurance Company Limited -Vs- Bhanumati Mahato & Ors. With COT/101/2024 Bhanumati Mahato -Vs.- Oriental Insurance Company Limited For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Paul. For the Respondents : Mr. Krishanu Banik, Mr. Tathagata Banik. Heard & Judgment on : 07.05.2025 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 30.06.2023 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track, 3rd Court, Sadar, Paschim Medinipur in M.A.C. Case No. 178/2019. 3. The learned Advocate representing the appellant/Insurance Company agitated the fact of contributory negligence on the part of the victim and also submitted that the offending vehicle was not involved in the accident, 2 in absence of proper documentary evidence the Tribunal erroneously considered the monthly income of the victim to be Rs.6,000/-, parental and filial consortium should not have been granted in favour of the victim. 4. The learned Advocate representing the respondents/claimants submitted to have filed a cross-objection seeking for enhancement of the monthly income to be Rs.18,000/- which the learned Tribunal did not consider in view of the document marked as exhibit – 11 as well as the evidence of P.W.-4.. 5. Considered the rival contentions of the learned Advocates representing the respective parties. 6. Since the occurrence of the accident, involvement of the offending vehicle, the driving license, Insurance certificate etc. are not disputed by the learned advocate representing the appellant/insurance company, this Court restricts itself only to the extent of rectifying the compensation awarded in the following manner. 7. The issue of contributory negligence was not agitated before the learned Trial Court stating that the victim driving the motor cycle was equally responsible to have occasioned the accident. The evidence of P.W.-4 revealed absence of trade licence being issued in the name of the company wherein the victim worked as a driver. P.W.-4 did not maintain a register of work of employees. He also did not maintain the salary register of his employees. He did not maintain the book of accounts with regard to the salary of his employees. He did not have any document to show that he used to pay Rs.18,000/- per month to the deceased in cash 3 by hand and his deposition in examination in chief was controverted in his cross-examination and, therefore, the sum of Rs.18,000/- to have been paid to the victim per month as his salary cannot be relied upon. However, since the accident occurred in the year 2018 the victim working as a driver could have earned Rs.10,000/- per month. 8. 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. 13,43,000/- is modified as follows:- Monthly Income Annual Income Add : 40% Future Prospect Less : 1/3rd Personal Expenses 1/4th Deduction (Rs. 1,78,000/- - Rs.44,500/-) Multiplier 15 (Rs.1,33,500 X 15) General Damages Amount of Compensation Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 1,20,000/- Rs. 48,000/- _______________ Rs.1,78,000/- Rs. 1,33,500/- Rs. 20,02,500/- Rs. 84,000/- Rs.20,86,500/- 9. The Respondents/claimants are entitled to receive the amount of Rs. 20,86,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per cent per annum 1 2017(4)TAC 673(S.C) 2 (2009) 6 SC 121 4 from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of actual realization. 10. The Learned Advocate for the respondent No.1/insurance company is to deposit the sum of Rs. 20,86,500/- along with interest as aforesaid before the office of the learned Registrar General, High Court Calcutta within six weeks from the date of passing of this order. 11. The office of the learned Registrar General High Court at Calcutta, shall encash the cheques and thereafter disburse the entire awarded amount to the respondents/claimants as mentioned in the impugned judgment of the Learned Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 3rd Court, Sadar, Paschim Medinipur in M.A.C. Case No. 178 of 2019 on proof of proper identification of the respondents/claimants subject to payment of ad valorem Court fees. 12. The instant appeal is disposed of accordingly. 13. The pending applications, if any, stands disposed of. 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.(Ct.)