ANJANI SINGH Vs. SALAUDDIN
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-91
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on
April 25,2014
Anjani Singh
Appellant
VERSUS
SALAUDDIN
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
U P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP VS. RAJESHWARI [LAWS(ALL)-2014-8-85] [REFERRED TO]TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. ALPANA KHANDHWAY [LAWS(DLH)-2014-11-262] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSUANCE COMPANY LTD VS. RUKHSANA TABASSUM [LAWS(ALL)-2014-10-118] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. T LAXMAN GOUD [LAWS(APH)-2014-12-152] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR AND ORS. VS. JASWANT SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2016-1-79] [REFERRED TO]
HEIRS AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECD GALABHAI ALIAS VS. KARA GOGAN RATHOD [LAWS(GJH)-2016-3-90] [REFERRED TO]
VIMAL M. PUJARI AND ORS. VS. GANESH M. KONAR AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH KANWAR AND ORS. VS. DALIP SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-8-153] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED AMBALAL HIMTAJI PRAJAPATI [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. HIMLIBEN W/O JADIYABHAI VIRJIBHAI PALAS [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. AMBALAL HIMTAJI PRAJAPATI AND ORS. [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-23] [REFERRED TO]
AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE VS. KASTURIBEN,WD/O CHANDUBHAI ATMARAM MARATHI (KULVADI) [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-46] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. REKHABEN HARISHRAO TUMBE [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-49] [REFERRED TO]
JYNI VS. RAPHEL.P.T [LAWS(KER)-2016-1-81] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT DAIRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. VS. SHARDABEN WD/O KANTILAL KESHABHAI @ KESHAVLAL [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-250] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. VS. R.VIJAYA [LAWS(MAD)-2015-6-566] [REFERRED]
SAJJANBEN NATHUBHAI DAYMA VS. GURUDIPSINH CHARANSINH JAT [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-345] [REFERRED TO]
M. VIJAYALAXMI DEVI VS. A.M. NAVEEN [LAWS(APH)-2016-3-65] [REFERRED TO]
KAZI SHAAKIRABANU ZABIEHULLAH - WIDOW & OTHER VS. SHAIKH IMTIYAZ MUNNAVARHUSSAIN & OTHER [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-281] [REFERRED]
GSRTC VS. HEIRS & LEGAL REP OF DECD NITINKUMAR PUNITRAY SOMPURA [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-332] [REFERRED]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. SALIMBANU KHURSHIDKHAN PATHAN & ORS [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-365] [REFERRED]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. KHALIBEN KALUBHAI BARIA MOTHER OF DECD & 4 ORS [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-373] [REFERRED]
PUNJIBEN W/D DECD GABHAJI DHAYAJI THAKORE & OTHER VS. BABUJI DHULAJI MAKWANA & OTHERS [LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-377] [REFERRED]
MUNESH & ORS. VS. UTTAR PARDESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(DLH)-2016-11-80] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD VS. MADHU DEVI & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2014-11-521] [REFERRED]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. MEENA BEGUM & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2014-12-477] [REFERRED]
NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED. DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOCHI 683101 VS. AYANA, D/O LATEASHOKAN, KARILPADICKAL HOUSE, MANNOOR, IRUPURAM VILLAGE [LAWS(KER)-2016-10-49] [REFERRED TO]
SHEELA VS. NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. [LAWS(KER)-2016-10-63] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. DARSHANA DEVI & OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-6-45] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. JAYANTIBHAI KANJIBHAI VAGHASIYA [LAWS(GJH)-2014-8-324] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. POONAM DEVI AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2014-9-524] [REFERRED]
AYASHABEN AMANJIBHAI SHERASIYA L.R. OF AMANJIBHAI H. SHERASIYA & ORS. VS. KANABHAI LALABHAI MANATH & ANR. [LAWS(GJH)-2016-11-29] [REFERRED TO]
NIRMALA AND OTHER VS. YOG RAJ AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-7-155] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. SH. BHAJAN SINGH AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-8-6] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. PACHIMATLA KAVITHA AND OTHERS [LAWS(TLNG)-2019-4-49] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGER, LEGAL, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. SREELEKSHMI [LAWS(KER)-2021-10-202] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)This civil appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated
29th November, 2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at
Chandigarh in FAO No.236 of 2001, wherein the High Court allowed the said
appeal and enhanced the compensation by [pic]1,20,600/- and awarded
interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The same is questioned by the
appellants-claimants, on the ground that just and reasonable compensation
was not awarded keeping in view the future prospects of income and further,
correct multiplier method was not applied taking into consideration the age
of the deceased at the time of death. Lastly, compensation under the
conventional heads towards loss of love and affection towards the widow,
children and parents of the deceased was also not awarded. Hence, this
appeal was filed by the appellants seeking further enhancement of
compensation.
(2.)The facts in brief are stated hereunder:
On 17.09.1997 Sergeant Dalbir Singh, husband of appellant No. 1, father of appellant nos. 2 to 4 and son of appellant no. 5 died in a road accident. The accident took place at 10.15 p.m. on National Highway No. 28 between Air Force Station, Gorakhpur and Nandanagar Police Station, when the deceased was going on his bicycle and was hit by truck No. UP-41A/1901 coming from Gorakhpur side. The said truck was driven by Respondent No.1, owned by Respondent No.2 and insured by Respondent No.3, United India Insurance Company.
On 24.11.1997, the appellant/claimants filed the Claim Petition No.217 of 1997 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (in short "the Tribunal") and claimed for [pic]15,00,000/- as compensation for loss to estate of the deceased. The Tribunal held that, the deceased Sergeant Dalbir Singh died because of the accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 and awarded the appellants [pic]2,49,600/- as compensation. The Tribunal determined the dependency of appellants as [pic]31,000/- per annum and applied the multiplier of 8 since the deceased suffered death at the age of 35 and the age of superannuation in the Air Force is 45-50 years.
(3.)Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal, the appellants-claimants filed First Appeal No. 234 of 2011 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh on 12.7.2000. The High Court allowed the appeal and held that assessment of monthly income by the Tribunal as [pic] 4030/- is correct based on the examination of the salary certificate. The finding of the Tribunal leading to deduction of 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses was held to be erroneous. Hence, this finding was set aside and only 1/4th of the compensation was deducted towards personal expenses. The total dependency amount came up to [pic]3,62,700/- by applying a multiplier of 10 and [pic]2,500/- was awarded towards funeral expenses and [pic]5,000 towards loss of consortium for the widow of the deceased. In total, a compensation of [pic]3,70,200/- was awarded. Thus, the compensation was enhanced by [pic]1,20,600/-, which carried an interest of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till the date of payment.
(2.)The facts in brief are stated hereunder:
On 17.09.1997 Sergeant Dalbir Singh, husband of appellant No. 1, father of appellant nos. 2 to 4 and son of appellant no. 5 died in a road accident. The accident took place at 10.15 p.m. on National Highway No. 28 between Air Force Station, Gorakhpur and Nandanagar Police Station, when the deceased was going on his bicycle and was hit by truck No. UP-41A/1901 coming from Gorakhpur side. The said truck was driven by Respondent No.1, owned by Respondent No.2 and insured by Respondent No.3, United India Insurance Company.
On 24.11.1997, the appellant/claimants filed the Claim Petition No.217 of 1997 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (in short "the Tribunal") and claimed for [pic]15,00,000/- as compensation for loss to estate of the deceased. The Tribunal held that, the deceased Sergeant Dalbir Singh died because of the accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 and awarded the appellants [pic]2,49,600/- as compensation. The Tribunal determined the dependency of appellants as [pic]31,000/- per annum and applied the multiplier of 8 since the deceased suffered death at the age of 35 and the age of superannuation in the Air Force is 45-50 years.
(3.)Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal, the appellants-claimants filed First Appeal No. 234 of 2011 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh on 12.7.2000. The High Court allowed the appeal and held that assessment of monthly income by the Tribunal as [pic] 4030/- is correct based on the examination of the salary certificate. The finding of the Tribunal leading to deduction of 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses was held to be erroneous. Hence, this finding was set aside and only 1/4th of the compensation was deducted towards personal expenses. The total dependency amount came up to [pic]3,62,700/- by applying a multiplier of 10 and [pic]2,500/- was awarded towards funeral expenses and [pic]5,000 towards loss of consortium for the widow of the deceased. In total, a compensation of [pic]3,70,200/- was awarded. Thus, the compensation was enhanced by [pic]1,20,600/-, which carried an interest of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till the date of payment.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.