# Smt. Meena & Ors v. U.O.I. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2023) 5 ILRA 1513
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-04-06
- **Case number:** First Appeal From Order No. 944 of 2018
- **Bench:** Ajay Bhanot
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-meena-ors-v-u-o-i-anr-50131
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Sri Arvind Kumar Goswami

A. Motor Accident Claim - Deceased Age -
Appellants asserted that the age of the
deceased was 19 years at the time of the
accident. Original copy of the school
leaving certificate of the deceased was
produced. PW-1 testified that the age of
the deceased was 19 years, which could
not
be
shaken
during
the
crossexamination. School leaving certificate
was not impeached by the respondents.
Trial
Court,
however,
relied
on
newspaper cuttings, the F.I.R., and the
post-mortem report and recorded that
the age of the deceased was 16 years.
Held: Newspaper reports could not be
considered admissible evidence in the
facts of the case. The entry in the
column of the post-mortem report is not
conclusive proof of the age of the
deceased. Finding of the Trial Court on
the age of the deceased was perverse
and liable to be set aside. Age of the
deceased was held to be 19 years. (Para
9, 10, 11, 12)

B. Motor Accident Claim - Deceased
Income
-
Deceased
worked
as
an
employee in an aluminum workshop.
Reliable guides to determine income in
such cases are the minimum wages
notified by the appropriate government
from time to time. A worker in an
aluminum workshop possesses various
skills,
often
acquired
on
the
job.
Workmen in this category may not have
formal qualifications, but their technical
skills cannot be doubted. It is due to
these skills that they render useful work
and are retained in establishments.The
Court held that the deceased was a
skilled workman whose job was of a
perennial nature, and he was drawing
regular monthly wages. The monthly
wages of the deceased were fixed at Rs.
5,000/-. (Para 21, 22, 23)

Allowed. (E-5)

## Text

5 All. Smt. Meena & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Anr.
1513
slashing the interest as the matter has
remain pending before this Court also for
no fault of the insurance company.. The
oral objection under Order 43 Rule 1 C.P.C
of Sri Subhash Chandra Srivastava is
accepted. The interest is to be paid from the
date of filing of claim petition which is the
law and it cannot be from the date the
insurance
company
was
impleaded,
however, due to passage of long time the
said order is disturbed for awarded amount
the interest at 7% from filing of the claim
petition till the judgment of tribunal and
thereafter it would be at 6% on the awarded
amount.

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

12. In view of the above, the appeal is
partly allowed. Total compensation of Rs.
2,01,200/- is allowed with interest at 7% from
the date of filing of the claim petition till
judgment and award of the tribunal and 6%
thereafter till amount is deposited. 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.

13. 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 Vs. Venugopal, Reported in 2012
(1) GLH (SC), 442, the order of investment
is not passed because applicants /claimants
are neither illiterate or rustic villagers.

14. 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.

15. 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
claimants in Nationalized Bank without
F.D.R.

16. Record be sent back to tribunal
forthwith.

17. This Court is thankful to both the
learned Advocates for ably assisting this
Court.
----------
(2023) 5 ILRA 1513
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 06.04.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AJAY BHANOT, J.

First Appeal From Order No. 944 of 2018

Smt. Meena & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
U.O.I. & Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, Sri Ajay Kr.
Srivastava
1514 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Arvind Kumar Goswami

A. Motor Accident Claim - Deceased Age -
Appellants asserted that the age of the
deceased was 19 years at the time of the
accident. Original copy of the school
leaving certificate of the deceased was
produced. PW-1 testified that the age of
the deceased was 19 years, which could
not
be
shaken
during
the
crossexamination. School leaving certificate
was not impeached by the respondents.
Trial
Court,
however,
relied
on
newspaper cuttings, the F.I.R., and the
post-mortem report and recorded that
the age of the deceased was 16 years.
Held: Newspaper reports could not be
considered admissible evidence in the
facts of the case. The entry in the
column of the post-mortem report is not
conclusive proof of the age of the
deceased. Finding of the Trial Court on
the age of the deceased was perverse
and liable to be set aside. Age of the
deceased was held to be 19 years. (Para
9, 10, 11, 12)

B. Motor Accident Claim - Deceased
Income
-
Deceased
worked
as
an
employee in an aluminum workshop.
Reliable guides to determine income in
such cases are the minimum wages
notified by the appropriate government
from time to time. A worker in an
aluminum workshop possesses various
skills,
often
acquired
on
the
job.
Workmen in this category may not have
formal qualifications, but their technical
skills cannot be doubted. It is due to
these skills that they render useful work
and are retained in establishments.The
Court held that the deceased was a
skilled workman whose job was of a
perennial nature, and he was drawing
regular monthly wages. The monthly
wages of the deceased were fixed at Rs.
5,000/-. (Para 21, 22, 23)

Allowed. (E-5)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot, J.)

1.
Heard
Shri
Santosh
Kumar
Srivastava,
learned
counsel
for
the
appellants-claimants, Shri Arvind Kumar
Goswami, learned counsel representing
Union of India.

2. This appeal arises out of the
judgment and order dated 25.11.2017
passed by the learned Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge,
Court No.10, Meerut (hereinafter referred
to as "Tribunal") in Motor Accident Claim
Case No.293 of 2014 awarding a sum of
Rs.1,42,000/- as compensation with interest
@ 7% annual interest.

3. The learned Tribunal partly allow
the claim of the appellants-claimants for
the death of one Akib (deceased). The
claimants are the legal heirs and dependent
of the deceased - Akib, who died in an
accident which occurred on 26.2.2014.

4. Shri Santosh Kumar Srivastava,
learned
counsel
for
the
claimantsappellants
contends
that
the
amount
awarded by the learned Tribunal is liable to
be enhanced. Learned Tribunal recorded
the perverse findings as regards the income
of the deceased.

5. Shri Arvind Kumar Goswami,
learned
Central
Government
Counsel
submits
that
income
was
correctly
determined by the learned tribunal on
notional
basis
since
the
appellantsclaimants failed to prove the income of the
deceased.

6. The respondents-Union of India
have not challenged the fact of the accident
or the liability of the driver. They are only
resisting
the
enhancement
in
the
compensation awarded to the claimantsappellants.
5 All. Smt. Meena & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Anr.
1515

I. Compensation awarded by the
learned tribunal:

7. The compensation awarded by the
learned tribunal in the impugned judgment
dated 25.11.2017 is depicted in a tabulated
form hereunder:

Sr.
No.
Heads
Amount (in rupees)
1
Monthly Income (A)
1,250/-
2
Annual
Income
(A x 12 = B)
1,250/-
x
12
= 15,000/-
3
Future prospects (C)
50%
of
15,000/-
= 7,500/-
4
Annual
Income
+
Future
Prospects
(B + C = D)

15,000+7,500/-
=22,500/-
5
Deduction
towards
Personal Expenses (E)
1/3
of
22,500/-
=7,500/-

Annual
Loss
of
Dependency (F)
7,500/-
6
Multiplier (G)
16
7
Total
loss
of
dependency
(F x G = H)

7,500
x
16
=1,20,000/-
8
Conventional Heads: (I)
(a) Loss of Love and
affection
(b) Loss of Mental Pain
(c) Funeral
(a)
10,000
+
(b)
10,000 + (c) 2,000/-
=22,000/-
9
Total compensation
(H + I = J)

1,42,000/-
10
Interest
7.00%

8.
The
issue
which
arises
for
consideration in this appeal is that :-

(A) Whether the learned Tribunal had
correctly determined the age of the
deceased in the record?

(B) Whether the learned Tribunal had
correctly determined the income of the
deceased or not?

(C) Compensation to which the
claimants are entitled.

8(A). Determination of age :-

9. The accident took place on
26.2.2014. The claimants-appellants have
asserted in the claim petition that the age of
the deceased was 19 years at the time of
accident. The original copy of the school
leaving certificate of the deceased was
produced before the learned Tribunal and
marked as paper no. 21C/12. PW-1 - Abid
Ali in his testimony before the trial Court
had testified that the age of the deceased
was 19 years. His statement was consistent
with the pleadings in the claim petition as
well as in the evidence and in the record.
His testimony could not be shaken during
the cross-examination. The school leaving
certificate was not impeached by the
respondents before the learned tribunal.
This Court has also examined the school
leaving certificate and upon its perusal it
appears to be a printed document.

10. The learned Trial Court while
finding that the age of the victim of
deceased was 16 years as relied on
newspaper cuttings, F.I.R. and the postmortem report. The aforesaid documents do
not state the correct age of the deceased.
The newspaper reports could not be
considered as admissible evidence in the
facts of the case. The entry in column of the
post-mortem is not conclusive proof of the
age of the deceased.

11. The evidence in regard to the age
produced by the claimants-appellants is
credible and the Court below erred by
returning findings to it.

12. This Court finds that the finding of
the Court below on the judgment of the age
of the victim of deceased is perverse and
liable to be set aside. The age of the
deceased was 19 years.
1516 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

8(B). Income of the deceased :-

13. The consistent claim of the
claimants-appellants was that the deceased
was working as an employee in an
aluminum work shop. P.W.1-Abid Ali
(father of the deceased) had testified before
the Court below that the deceased was
working under an aluminum contractor in
his establishment. He was drawing a salary
of about Rs.9000/- per month.

14. PW-3 - Mehboob, who was the
employer of the deceased, also deposed
before the learned tribunal that the
deceased
was
an
employee
in
his
establishment who was drawing a salary of
Rs.8,000/-to Rs.9,000/- per month. Under
cross-examination,
P.W.3-Mehboob
admitted that he did not maintain the
workers' register in his establishment.

15. The learned tribunal disbelieved
the testimony of PW-1 and PW-3, as
regards, the income and employment of the
deceased on the footing that PW-3 had
admitted that he was not maintaining the
register of regular employees in his
establishment. The certificate issued by the
employee of the deceased contains a recital
that the deceased earned Rs.8,000/- to
R.9,000/- per month. The said certificate
was discarded by the learned tribunal on
the footing that the employee had admitted
in his cross-examination that he did not
maintain a regular register of workman in
his establishment.

16. I am afraid the learned tribunal
was misdirected in facts and law. The
applicant was working in the informal
sector of the economy. The aforesaid sector
is largely undocumented. It is the common
knowledge that in such small establishment
employers often do not maintain regular
registers of their employees.

17. The testimonies of P.W.1 and
P.W.3, the pleadings and the evidences
establish that the deceased was working as
a casual workman in the aluminum
workshop.

18. The P.W.1 and P.W.3 in their
testimonies remained firmed as regards the
employment of the deceased as a casual
worker in the aluminum factory of the
P.W.3. On this issue the witnesses could not
be shaken under cross-examination.

19. In the wake of the aforesaid
depositions of the P.W.1 and P.W.3,
pleadings and evidences in the record, this
Court finds that the deceased was working
as a casual workman in the aluminum
workshop of P.W.3.

20. The learned tribunal erred in law
by a mechanically applying the notional
income of Rs.15,000/- per annum to the
facts of this case.

21. The determination of the income in
such cases when the employers do not
maintain a proper documentation of the
employees
often
a
vexed
question.
However, there are reliable guides to
determine income in such cases including
the minimum wages notified by the
appropriate government from time to time.
A worker in an aluminum workshop
possesses various skills which are often
acquired on the job. The workmen in this
category
may
not
have
formal
qualifications, but their technical skills
cannot be doubted. It is on account of these
skills that they render useful work and are
retained in the establishments.
5 All. Smt. Meena & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Anr.
1517

22. Considering the nature of the work
and the testimonies of P.W.1 and P.W.3, this
Court can safely conclude that the deceased
was a skilled workman whose job was of a
perennial nature and he was drawing a
regular monthly wages.

23.
In
the
wake
of
preceding
discussion, the monthly wages of the
deceased are fixed at Rs.5,000/-.

24. In view of the above, the judgment
and order dated 25.11.2017 passed by the
learned
Motor
Accident
Claims
Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court
No.10, Meerut is set aside and is
accordingly modified.

8(C).
Determination
of
Compensation
to
which
claimantsrespondents are entitled:

25.
In
the
wake
of
preceding
discussion, the amount of compensation
awarded to the claimants is tabulated
below:

i. Date of Accident
-26.02.2014

ii. Date of death

-26.02.2014

iii. Name of the deceased
-Akib

iv. Age of the deceased
-19 years

v. Occupation of the deceased -

Worker in Aluminum Fabrication
Establishment

vi.
Income
of
the
deceased
-
Rs.7,000/-
vii. Name, Age and Relationship of
claimants with the deceased

Sr. No.
Name
Age
Relation
1
Smt. Meena
43
Mother
2
Abid Ali
45
Father
3
Asif
15
Brother

viii. Computation of Compensation

Sr. No.
Heads
Amount (in rupees)
1
Monthly Income
(A)
5,000/-
2
Annual Income
(A x 12 = B)
5,000/- x 12
= 60,000/-
3
Future prospects
(C)
50% of 60,000/-
= 30,000/-
4
Annual Income +
Future Prospects
(B + C = D)
60,000 + 30,000/-
=90,000/-
5
Deduction
towards Personal
Expenses (E)

1/2 of 90,000/-
=45,000/-

Annual Loss of
Dependency (D-E
= F)
90,000-45,000/-=
45,000/-
6
Multiplier (G)
18
7
Total
loss
of
dependency
(F x G = H)
45,000 x 18

=8,10,000/-
8
Conventional
Heads: (I)
(a) Loss of Love
and affection
(b)
Loss
of
Mental Pain
(c) Funeral
70,000/-

9
Total
compensation
(H + I = J)
8,10,000 + 70,000/-
=8,80,000/-
10
Interest
7.00%

II. Conclusion and Directions:

26. The amount of compensation to which
the claimants-appellants have thus been found
entitled shall be deposited by the corporation
within three months before the learned tribunal.
Thereafter the learned tribunal shall release the
amount to the claimants without delay. The
amount already disbursed to the claimants (if
any) shall be duly adjusted.

27. The instant appeal is partly
allowed to the extent indicated above.
1518 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
----------
(2023) 5 ILRA 1518
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 23.01.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SUNEET KUMAR, J.
THE HON'BLE RAJENDRA KUMAR-IV, J.

First Appeal No. 43 of 2023

Smt. Monica Saravanan ...Appellant
Versus
R. Sarwanan ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Sujan Singh

Counsel for the Respondent:

Civil Law - Family Courts Act, 1984-
Section 10 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 -
Section 13 - Divorce Petition - Power of
attorney - Whether wife can appoint her
father to do pairvi of the Divorce Petition
on her behalf, through special power of
attorney? - Held - Safeguard noted in
Syed Wasif Husain Rizvi Vs Hasan Raza
Khan & 6 others, AIR 2016 All 5, would
generally apply to power of attorney filed
in court proceedings on behalf of the
principal/donor or on behalf of a party to
a lis. Power of attorney by which the
donor authorises the donee must be
brought on the record and must be filed
together with the petition/application;
The affidavit which is executed by the
holder of a power of attorney must
contain a St.ment that the donor is alive
and specify the reasons for the inability of
the donor to remain present before the
Court to swear the affidavit; and The
donee must be confined to those acts
which he is authorised by the power of
attorney to discharge. In the event the
Court requires oral evidence, that can be
ensured through video conference. (Para
11, 12, 14)

Allowed. (E-5)

List of Cases cited:

1. S. Ramachandra Rao Vs S. Nagabhushana
Rao & ors. (AIR 2022 SC 517)

2. Manju Devi Vs St. of Raj. & anr., (2019) 0
Supreme (SC) 462.

3. Haseen Siddiqui @ Jahangir Vs St. of U.P. &
ors., (2013) 0 Supreme (All) 2700.

4. Syed Wasif Husain Rizvi Vs Hasan Raza Khan
& ors., (AIR 2016 All 52).

(Delivered by Hon'ble Suneet Kumar, J.
&
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV, J.)

1. Heard learned Counsel for the
plaintiff-appellant/wife.

2. The instant appeal is directed
against the order dated 17.11.2022, passed
by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra,
in Case No.3039 of 2022, (Smt. Monica
Saravanan versus R. Saravanan), on an
Application (8-Ga) filed by the appellant,
wherein, the prayer of the appellant,
appointing her father, to do pairvi in the
case through special power of attorney, as
appellant would not be available in the
country, as she intents to proceed to Canada
to pursue her carrier. Application came to
be rejected by the impugned order,
wherein, it is noted by the learned Trial
Court that the application under Order 3
Rule 2 CPC has not been instituted through
an agent or power of attorney holder. It is
further noted that the appellant-plaintiff is
present in the Court and submits that for
further proceedings she has appointed her
father through special power of attorney to
do pairvi in the matter. The application
came to be rejected, as in the opinion of the