# New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Allahabad v. Smt. Pramila & Ors

- **Citation:** (2023) 9 ILRA 192
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-08-28
- **Case number:** First Appeal From Order No. 1202 of 1999
- **Bench:** Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/new-india-assurance-co-ltd-allahabad-v-smt-pramila-ors-50776
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Civil Law - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -
Section 167 - Income Tax Act, 1961 -
Section
194-A
(3)
(ix)
:-
Appeal
-
challenging the Award by insurance company -
Accident is not disputed - deceased was a trolly
puller died on spot, left behind his father,
widow, four sons and a daughter - Claim -The
tribunal considered the deceased's age to be
between 30-35 years, his income to be Rs.
2700/- per month, deducted 1/3rd towards
personal expenses, applied a multiplier of 17,
added
Rs.
7000/-
towards
non-pecuniary
damages, and granted interest at the rate of
12% - quantum of compensation - Appellant
argued that the income considered by the
tribunal was on the higher side and the interest
rate of 12% was not appropriate for the year
1999 - Court finds that, the rate of interest in
1997 was 9% and not 12% - the deceased's
age was disputed, and it was argued that the
deduction for personal expenses should be 1/5th
as per the judgment of the Apex Court in
National Insurance Company Limited Vs Pranay
Sethi & ors. - held, the court concluded that the
total compensation payable to the appellants
should be re-calculated with a 9% interest rate
from the date of filing of the claim till the
decision of the award - hence, the appeal is
partly allowed - the judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal are modified to the extent
specified - The respondent-Insurance Company
shall deposit the additional amount within 12
weeks with interest as directed - directions
issued accordingly. (Para - 8, 10, 13, 15)

Appeal Allowed. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

192 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Act, 2015, the other issues are only
academic in nature which are not required
to be considered or to be answered by the
Court.

74. For the aforesaid reasons we
allow both appeals and set aside the
judgment and decree dated 28.3.2022
passed
by
the
Presiding
Officer,
Commercial Court, Gautam Budh Nagar in
Suit (Comm) No.167 of 2021.
----------
(2023) 9 ILRA 192
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.08.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DR. KAUSHAL JAYENDRA
THAKER, J.

First Appeal From Order No. 1202 of 1999
With
First Appeal From Order No. 1979 of 2021

The
New
India
Assurance
Co.
Ltd.,
Allahabad ...Appellant
Versus
Smt. Pramila & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant:
No, Sri P.K. Sinha, Sri R.K. Mishra, Poonam
Srivastava

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Sharve Singh, Sri Arvind Kumar, Ms.
Arushi Khare, Sri A.L. Jaiswal

Civil Law - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -
Section 167 - Income Tax Act, 1961 -
Section
194-A
(3)
(ix)
:-
Appeal
-
challenging the Award by insurance company -
Accident is not disputed - deceased was a trolly
puller died on spot, left behind his father,
widow, four sons and a daughter - Claim -The
tribunal considered the deceased's age to be
between 30-35 years, his income to be Rs.
2700/- per month, deducted 1/3rd towards
personal expenses, applied a multiplier of 17,
added
Rs.
7000/-
towards
non-pecuniary
damages, and granted interest at the rate of
12% - quantum of compensation - Appellant
argued that the income considered by the
tribunal was on the higher side and the interest
rate of 12% was not appropriate for the year
1999 - Court finds that, the rate of interest in
1997 was 9% and not 12% - the deceased's
age was disputed, and it was argued that the
deduction for personal expenses should be 1/5th
as per the judgment of the Apex Court in
National Insurance Company Limited Vs Pranay
Sethi & ors. - held, the court concluded that the
total compensation payable to the appellants
should be re-calculated with a 9% interest rate
from the date of filing of the claim till the
decision of the award - hence, the appeal is
partly allowed - the judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal are modified to the extent
specified - The respondent-Insurance Company
shall deposit the additional amount within 12
weeks with interest as directed - directions
issued accordingly. (Para - 8, 10, 13, 15)

Appeal Allowed. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

1. National Insurance Comp. Ltd. Vs Pranay
Sethi & ors., AIR 2017 (SC) 5157,

2. Sarla Verma Vs Delhi Transport Corp., (2009)
6 SCC 121,

3. Lakkamma Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
AIR 2021 SC 3301,

4. A.V. Padma Vs Venugopal, Reported in 2012
(1) GLH (SC), 442,

5. Smt. Hansaguri P. Ladhani Vs The Oriental
Insurance Comp. Ltd., reported in 2007(2) GLH
291,

6. Review Application No.1 of 2020 in First
Appeal From Order No.23 of 2001 (Smt.
Sudesna & ors. Vs Hari Singh & anr.),

7. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company
Private
Ltd.
Vs
U.O.I.
&
ors.
-
Writ
Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 534/2020 - SC - order
dated 27.01.2022.
9 All. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Allahabad Vs. Smt. Pramila & Ors.
193
(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal
Jayendra Thaker, J.)

1. Heard Sri P.K.Sinha, learned
counsel for the appellants and Sri Sharve
Singh, learned counsel for the respondents
in F.A.F.O No. 1202 of 1999, Sri Sharve
Singh, learned counsel for the appellants in
F.A.F.O No. 1979 of 2021 and Ms Aarushi
Khare, learned counsel for respondents.

2. These appeals, challenges the
judgement and award dated 29.5.1999
passed
by
M.A.C.T/IVth-Additional
District
Judge,
Allahabad
(hereinafter
referred to as "Tribunal") in M.A.C.P. Case
No. 234 of 1997. The accident is not in
dispute. The only question which remains
to be considered in these appeals is whether
the
compensation
awarded
is
just
compensation in view of the settled legal
position of law.

3. Brief facts as culled out from the
record are on 23.01.1997 deceased Chaggu
Lal at about 3:00 p.m was taking his trolley
towards Mahoba at the same time a truck
bearing no. U.P. 15B 2657 driven by its
driver rashly and negligently hit the trolley
of deceased as a result of which Chaggu
Lal died on the spot.

4. The deceased Chaggu Lal was a
trolley puller in a shop who has left behind
him his father, widow, four sons and a
daughter. The tribunal has considered his
age between the age bracket of 30-35 years
and considered his income to be Rs. 2700/-
p.m, deducted 1/3rd towards personal
expenses, granted multiplier of 17, added
Rs. 7000/- towards non pecuniary damages
and granted interest at the rate of 12%.

5. It is submitted by Sri P.K. Sinha,
learned counsel for the appellants in
F.A.F.O No. 1202 of 1999 that income
considered by the tribunal is on the higher
side and the rate of interest at 12% was not
the rapo rate in the year 1999 as against this
Sri Sharve Singh, learned counsel for the
claimant's in F.A.F.O No. 1979 of 2021
submitted that no amount under the head of
future loss of income has been calculated
by the tribunal. It is vehemently submitted
by Ms Aarushi Khare, learned counsel for
the insurance company in F.A.F.O No.
1979 of 2021 that the amount awarded is
just and proper rather the appellant of the
insurance company for challenging the
compensation awarded is likely to be
allowed and therefore she adopts the
submission of Sri P.K.Sinha, learned
counsel for the appellants in F.A.F.O No.
1202 of 1999.

6. As far as interest is concerned the
appeal of the insurance company will have
to be allowed. The rate of interest even in
the year of accident namely in 1997 was
9% and not 12% and therefore the amount
awarded would be recalculated with 9% for
the date of filing of the writ petition till the
decision of award.

7. The deceased was in the age
bracket of 36 to 40 years which has been
seriously disputed by Sri Sharve Singh,
learned counsel that deceased had left
behind his widow, four sons and a daughter
and therefore it is submitted by Sri Sharve
Singh, learned counsel that deduction onf
1/3rd for personal expenses should be 1/5th
as per the judgment of Apex Court in
National Insurance Company Limited
Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, AIR 2017
(SC) 5157. It is further submitted that
under the head of non pecuniary damages
only Rs. 7000/- has been which is less
compared to the amount to be awarded. The
tribunal could not have gone by the U.P.
194 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Motor Vehicles rules and awarded Rs.
7000/- as non-pecuniary damages.

8. Having considered the facts and
circumstances of the case, the deceased was a
trolley puller in a shop, his income in the said
place can be considered Rs. 27,00/- p.m. as
decided by the tribunal, 40% of this monthly
income would have to be added. The
deceased was in the age bracket of 36-40
years at the time of accident hence multiplier
of 17 as per the judgment of Sarla Verma
Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6
SCC 121, would be admissible. As far as the
submission of Sri Sharve Singh, learned
counsel that 1/5th should be deducted, this
Court cannot accept the same as all the
children would part one portion between
them, hence, 1/3rd deducted for personal
expenses is just and proper and Rs. 70,000/-
for non pecuniary damages.

9. Hence, the total compensation
payable to the appellants is computed
herein below:

i. Income : Rs.2700/-

ii. Percentage towards future
prospects : 40% namely Rs.1080/-

iii. Total income : Rs. 2700 +
1080 = Rs. 3780/-

iv. Income after deduction of
1/3rd : Rs. 2520/-

v. Annual loss : Rs. 2520 x 12 =
Rs. 30,240/-

vi. Multiplier applicable : 17

vii. Total loss : Rs. 30,240 x 17 =
Rs. 5,14,080/-

xii. Amount under non-pecuniary
head : Rs.70,000/-

xiii.
Total
compensation
:
5,84,080/-

10. The interest on the enhanced
amount would be 9% from the date of
filing of the claim petition till the amount is
deposited but thereafter, for the period for
which it has remained pending on the list
without even the appeal been condoned, it
is rightly pointed out by Sri. P.K.Sinha and
Ms Aarushi Khare, learned counsels for the
insurance company that interest would be
slashed as per the judgment of Apex Court
in
Lakkamma
Vs.
United
India
Insurance Co. Ltd. AIR 2021 SC 3301,
hence 4% on enhanced amount from the
dated of filing of the claim petition till the
amount is deposited.

11. No amount shall be kept in fixed
deposit. The minor children would have become
major by now, the daughter might have been
married she shall be summoned and the amount
proportionate to their share would be paid by
account payee cheque by the tribunal in view of
the judgment of A.V. Padma V/s. Venugopal,
Reported in 2012 (1) GLH (SC), 442.

12. No other grounds are urged orally when
the matter was heard.

13. In view of the above, the appeal is partly
allowed. Judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid
extent. The respondent-Insurance Company shall
deposit the additional amount within a period of
12 weeks from today with interest as directed
above.

14. On depositing the amount in the
Registry of Tribunal, Registry is directed to first
deduct the amount of deficit court fees, if any.
Considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of A.V. Padma (supra),
the order of investment is not passed because
applicants /claimants are neither illiterate or rustic
villagers.

15. In view of the ratio laid down by
Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of
9 All. State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Uttar Pradesh Senior Basic Shikshak Sangh
195
Smt. Hansaguri P. Ladhani v/s The
Oriental
Insurance
Company
Ltd.,
reported in 2007(2) GLH 291, total
amount of interest, accrued on the principal
amount
of
compensation
is
to
be
apportioned on financial year to financial
year basis and if the interest payable to
claimant for any financial year exceeds
Rs.50,000/-,
insurance
company/owner
is/are entitled to deduct appropriate amount
under the head of 'Tax Deducted at Source'
as provided u/s 194A (3) (ix) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 and if the amount of interest
does not exceeds Rs.50,000/- in any
financial year, registry of this Tribunal is
directed to allow the claimant to withdraw
the
amount
without
producing
the
certificate from the concerned Income- Tax
Authority. The aforesaid view has been
reiterated by this High Court in Review
Application No.1 of 2020 in First Appeal
From Order No.23 of 2001 (Smt. Sudesna
and others Vs. Hari Singh and another)
while disbursing the amount.

16.

Fresh
Award
be
drawn
accordingly in the above petition by the
tribunal as per the modification made
herein. The Tribunals in the State shall
follow the direction of this Court as herein
aforementioned as far as disbursement is
concerned, it should look into the condition
of the litigant and the pendency of the
matter and judgment of A.V. Padma
(supra). The same is to be applied looking
to the facts of each case.

17. The Tribunal shall follow the
guidelines issued by the Apex Court in
Bajaj
Allianz
General
Insurance
Company Private Ltd. v. Union of India
and others vide order dated 27.1.2022, as
the purpose of keeping compensation is to
safeguard the interest of the claimants. As
10 years have elapsed, the amount be
deposited in the Saving Account of
claimants in Nationalized Bank without
F.D.R.

18. Record be sent back to the
tribunal.

19. This Court is thankful to all the
four learned counsels for getting this old
appeal disposed of.
----------
(2023) 9 ILRA 195
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 30.08.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, J.
THE HON'BLE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

Special Appeal No. 29 of 2022
with other connected cases

State of U.P. & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
Uttar
Pradesh
Senior
Basic Shikshak
Sangh ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellants:
Mohit Jauhari

Counsel for the Respondent:
Girish Chandra Verma

A. Service Law - Constitution of India -
Article 14 & 16 - Right to equality -
Rational Classification - New Pension
Scheme - GO dated 08.04.2009 clarifying
to cover all such educational institutions,
which
came
under
grant-in-aid
subsequent to 01.04.2005, under the New
Pension Scheme (NPS) - Constitutional
validity
challenged
-
Classification
between aided and unaided institution -
Permissibility - UP St. Aided Educational
Institutions
Employees
Contributory
Provident Fund, Insurance Pension Rules,
1964 is made applicable only to aided