# Smt. Malti Devi & Anr v. Virendra Kumar & Ors - **Citation:** (2023) 5 ILRA 174 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2023-03-14 - **Case number:** First Appeal From Order No. 560 of 1997 - **Bench:** Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-malti-devi-anr-v-virendra-kumar-ors-50258 - **Pages:** 4 ## Headnote A. Civil Law - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - challenge to-quantum of compensation of a minor child-Tribunal considered notional income of 14 years deceased child to be 300/-p.m and ultimately assessed the total compensation to be 52,000/- with 12% interest-The accident occurred in the year 1994 therefore the amount of Rs. 1,56,000/- would be just and proper as held by Apex Court in catena of decisionsMore so, rate of interest is too, it is modified upto 7.5% after making a substantial enhancement in the award amount. (Para 1 to 13) The appeal is partly allowed. (E-6) List of Cases cited: ## Text 174 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES not be examined further either by this Court or by the Tribunal in consequence of the order that this Court proposes to make. This leaves this Court with the fourth Issue, about which there are no comments by the Tribunal at all. The issue has not at all been examined in consequence of the findings on Issue No.1. Since the findings on Issue No.1 have been reversed by this Court, Issue No.4 is required to be determined by the Tribunal in the first instance and the quantum of the award decided on the basis of the evidence of record. Parties would be at liberty to lead further evidence, if they so desire on the issue of quantum alone. No other matter is required to be re-determined by the Tribunal. 32. In the result, this appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 02.09.2000 is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for hearing parties afresh on Issue No.4 and passing an award in accordance with law determining just compensation. The matter shall be decided afresh within a period of three months next from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment by the Tribunal. 33. Let the record be sent down at once to the Tribunal which now has jurisdiction in the matter. ---------- (2023) 5 ILRA 174 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 14.03.2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J. First Appeal From Order No. 560 of 1997 Smt. Malti Devi & Anr. ...Appellants Versus Virendra Kumar & Ors. ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri Madhav Jain Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Amaresh Sinha, Sri Amresh Singh, Sri Anubhav Sinha A. Civil Law - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - challenge to-quantum of compensation of a minor child-Tribunal considered notional income of 14 years deceased child to be 300/-p.m and ultimately assessed the total compensation to be 52,000/- with 12% interest-The accident occurred in the year 1994 therefore the amount of Rs. 1,56,000/- would be just and proper as held by Apex Court in catena of decisionsMore so, rate of interest is too, it is modified upto 7.5% after making a substantial enhancement in the award amount. (Para 1 to 13) The appeal is partly allowed. (E-6) List of Cases cited: 1. Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali Vs Shyam Kishore Murmu (2021) 0 SC 687 2. R.K.Malik & anr.. Vs Kiran Pal & ors. (2009) 0 SC 1113 3. Sarla Dixit Vs Balwant Yadav (1996) 3 SCC 179 4. Late Wadhwa Vs St. of Bih. (2001) 8 SCC 197 5. Kishan Gopal & anr.. Vs Lala & ors. (2014) 1 SCC 244 6. NICL Vs Mannat Johal & ors. (2019) 2 TAC 705 SC 5 All. Smt. Malti Devi & Anr. Vs. Virendra Kumar & Ors. 175 7. A.V. Padma Vs Venugopal, 2012 (1) GLH (SC) 442, 8. Bajaj Allianz Gen. Ins. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI & ors. (Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.) 1. Heard Sri Madhav Jain, learned counsel for the appellant-claimants who are the parents of the minor child who succumb to death at the age of 14 of years and Sri Anubhav Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Amaresh Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and order dated 18.03.1997 passed by M.A.C.T/Xth-Additional District Judge, Agra (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in M.A.C.P. No. 81 of 1994 awarding a sum of Rs. 52,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 12%. 3. Five issues are granted in favour of the claimants. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute and was decided against the respondents. The issue whether the vehicle was insured and there was any breach of policy was also answered in favour of the appellant. The respondent-Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them. The only issue to be decided is, the quantum of compensation awarded. 4. Brief facts as culled out from the record are that on 27.01.1994, deceased Rakesh Kumar was travelling in a bus bearing registration no. U.P.-80E-9416 which due to rash and negligent driving met with an accident as a result of which deceased Rakesh Kumar sustained grievous injuries. Rakesh Kumar was admitted to S.N. Hospital, Agra where he succumb to his injuries on 29.01.1994. 5. The tribunal comes to the conclusion that the deceased was 14 years of age and therefore was not contributing to the income of the claimants and therefore considered notional income to be Rs. 600/- p.m but thereafter held that his income would be Rs. 300/- p.m namely Rs. 36,00/- p.a., granted multiplier of 15 which would be Rs. 36,000/- and granted what is known as amount under no fault liability to be Rs. 50,000/-, granted Rs. 2000/- for funeral and ultimately assessed the total compensation to be Rs. 52,000/- with 12% interest. 6. The accident occurred on 27.01.1994. It is contended by Sri Madhav Jain, learned counsel for the appellant that even in the year of accident i.e in 1994, the law was that a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- was admissible. It is further submitted that recently the Apex Court discussing all the judgments as in the case of Kurvan Ansari alias Kurvan Ali Vs. Shyam Kishore Murmu, 2021 0 (SC) 687 has held that for a child of 7 years also the Court has granted a sum of Rs. 4,70,000/-. After discussing all the judgments on the question of grant of compensation for the death of a minor children he has heavily relied upon the judgment of R.K. Malik & Another Vs. Kiran Pal & Others, 2009 0 SC 1113. 7. As against this, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the accident occurred in the year 1994. The judgment of the Apex Court in what is known as Upahar tragedy be considered. The judgement of Sarla Dixit Vs. Balwant Yadav, (1996) 3 SCC 179 and that of Lata Wadhwa Vs. State of Bihar, (2001) 176 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES 8 SCC 197 be considered. He has further relied on the judgment of the undersigned and has contended that in the year of accident the amount of Rs. 1, 56,000/- would be just and proper. 8. Having considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the oral objection raised under Order 43 Rule 1 C.P.C, the learned counsel for the respondent objected that the 12% rate of interest is too high, the rate of interest in the year 1997 also requires reconsideration. The amount would be for 14 year minor child in the year 1994 where the parents who are aged 45 and 47 years would be Rs. 1,56,000/- as held by Apex Court in catena of decisions. The decision of Apex Court in case of Kurvan Ansari (supra) and Kishan Gopal and Another Vs. Lala and others (2014) 1 SCC 244 deal with the accident post year 2000. 9. As far as issue of rate of interest is concerned, it would be 7.5% in view of the latest decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal and Others, 2019 (2) T.A.C. 705 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court has held as under : "13. The aforesaid features equally apply to the contentions urged on behalf of the claimants as regards the rate of interest. The Tribunal had awarded interest at the rate of 12% p.a. but the same had been too high a rate in comparison to what is ordinarily envisaged in these matters. The High Court, after making a substantial enhancement in the award amount, modified the interest component at a reasonable rate of 7.5% p.a. and we find no reason to allow the interest in this matter at any rate higher than that allowed by High Court." 10. No other grounds are urged orally when the matter was heard. 11. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Award and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The amount be deposited by the respondent-Insurance Company within a period of 12 weeks from today with interest as directed above. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited. 12. 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 V/s. Venugopal, Reported in 2012 (1) GLH (SC), 442, the order of investment is not passed because applicants /claimants are neither illiterate or rustic villagers. 13. 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. 14. 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 long period has elapsed, the amount be deposited in the Saving Account of 5 All. Smt. Shyam Sundari Devi Vs. Ajay Kumar Gupta Ors. 177 claimants in Nationalized Bank without F.D.R. 15. Record be sent back to tribunal forthwith. 16. This Court is thankful to both the learned Advocates for ably assisting this Court. ---------- (2023) 5 ILRA 177 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.03.2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J. First Appeal From Order No. 616 of 1996 Smt. Shyam Sundari Devi ...Appellant Versus Ajay Kumar Gupta & Ors. ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: Sri R.C. Srivastava, Sri S.K. Srivastava Counsel for the Respondents: Sri H.N. Singh, Sri B.N. Singh Civil Law - Motor Accident Claim - Appellant are claimant-accident and negligence is not in dispute-quantum of compensation is disputed-deceased was 28 years of age-working as homeguard-survived by his widow and two sons-income should be at least Rs. 1500/-per month-1/3rd to be deducted-50% of the income added for future loss-multiplier of 17 and pecuniary damages calculated. Appeal partly allowed. (E-9) List of Cases cited: 1. A.V. Padma Vs Venugopal, Reported in 2012 (1) GLH (SC), 442 2. Smt. Hansaguri P. Ladhani Vs The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., reported in 2007(2) GLH 291 3. Review Application No.1 of 2020 in First Appeal From Order No.23 of 2001 (Smt. Sudesna & ors. Vs Hari Singh & anr.) (Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent. Officers of National Insurance Company are present. 2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgement and decree dated 24.04.1996 passed by M.A.C.T/I-Additional District Judge, Mau (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in M.A.C.P. No. 54 of 1992. The accident is not in dispute. His death by the accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute. The only issue to be decided is, the quantum of compensation awarded. 3. Brief facts as culled out from the record are that deceased Virendra Kumar Srivastava was working as a homeguard at police station Netpura, District Varanasi. On 07.06.1992 at about 4:00 a.m when deceased Virendra Kumar Srivastava was returning back with Sup-Inspector Kedarnath Pandey in a jeep bearing registration no. M.P.-7B/0927 after completing their work from Mau, at cemented road near dandi village near Rajdev Ram baag a truck bearing registration no. URQ-6354 going towards Gorakhpur from Mau driven by its driver rashly and negligently dashed into Jeep as a result of which deceased died on the spot along-with three other persons travelling with him.