S/L 8 28.07.2026 Court No.9 Swd IN THE High COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE FMA 1147 of 2008 Arif Gazi Vs. Aloke Kumar Singh & Anr. Mr. Niranjan Maity, Mrs. Indrani Ghosh. … for the Appellant. Mr. Rajesh Singh. … for the Respondent. 1. Learned Advocates for the parties are present. 2. Heard the learned Advocate for the parties. 3. The appellant before this Court was a claimant in case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and is aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 26.09.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 10th Court, Alipore, South 24 Paraganas in MAC case No.14 of 2007. 4. The case of the claimant before the learned Trial Court may be summed up thus: On 03.03.2005 the victim/claimant Arif Gazi while going towards Amtala from Kolkata side by driving motor cycle following the extreme eastern side of Diamond Harbour Raod. Near Duro Company while driver of the offending vehicle No.WB-11A-2660 was coming from opposite direction and negligently dashed against the 2 motorcyclist Arir Gazi by going to the wrong side of the said road. As a result the victim fell down on the road and sustained severe injury and causing permanent disablement. 5. Pursuant to filing of the claim case notice was issued upon the opposite parties. Opposite party vehicle owner did not contest the case. However the opposite party insurance company contested the case by filing written statement. The issues were framed and evidence was adduced. 6. Learned Trial Court upon considering the evidence adduced and upon hearing the learned advocates was pleased to dispose of the claim case by observing and directing as follows: “Hence, it is Ordered that the claim petition U/s. 166 of M.V. Act be and the same is allowed on contest against the O. P. no. 2 and exparte against the O.P.no.1. The petitioner do get an award to the tune of Rs.1,10,545/- from the O.Ps. The O.P.no.1 being indemnified by the insurance company. The O.P. no. 2 is hereby directed to issue an account payee cheque of Rs.1,10, 545/- (Rs. one laks ten thousand five hundred forty five only) along with interest at the rate of 6% from date of institution of the case till its realisation. The O.P. no. 2 is directed to pay the amount of compensation within 3 one month from the date of this order failing which the entire amount will carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date due, till its realization. There is no order as to cost. Let a copy of this judgement be supplied to the insurance company free of cost to expedite payment.” 7. The claimant being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Trial Court has come up with the instant appeal. 8. Heard learned Advocate for the appellant and learned Advocate for the respondent insurance company. Perused the evidence adduced and materials on record. 9. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the learned Trial Judge erred in considering the notional income of the claimant as Rs.15,000/- when his employer adduced evidence that he was paying Rs.100/- per day. 10. Learned Advocate further submits that the learned Trial Judge erred in considering the disablement to be 20% when the disability certificate shows that the claimant has suffered 50% disability. Learned Advocate also submits that the compensation awarded on account of pain and suffering is also meager. 11. Learned Advocate appearing for the respondent insurance company submits that considering the 4 price index in the year 2005, the learned Trial Judge did not err in considering the annual income to be Rs.15,000/-. Learned Advocate further submits that even if the salary paid by the employer of the victim is accepted, there will not be 30 working days and it cannot be more than Rs.20,000/- per year. It is also submitted by the learned Advocate that the claimant was not examined by the medical board with regard to the disability. 12. Upon hearing the learned Advocate and considering the facts of the case, although it appears that the learned Trial Judge could have assessed the annual income as Rs.20,000/- and could have assessed more compensation on account of pain and sufferings and could have applied the multiplier of 18 but instead of proceeding with regard to arithmetical calculation the Court is of the view that it would be just and reasonable to award compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to the appellant. 13. Thus, this appeal FMA 1147 of 2008 stands disposed. The judgment and award dated 26.09.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 10th Court, Alipore, South 24 Paraganas in MAC case No.14 of 2007 stands modified to the extent that the claimant appellant will be entitled to compensation of 5 Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing claim case till today. 14. The respondent insurance company shall deposit Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% before Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 15. In the event, compensation awarded by the learned Trial Court is already paid or deposited no further deposit be made. The appellant claimant will be entitled to withdraw the compensation upon compliance of necessary formalities. 16. Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY, J.)