ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SACHINDRA THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellant and respondent No. 1, the claimant. There is none appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2, the owner of the vehicle involved. With consent of learned Counsel, present, this appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. This appeal has been preferred against judgment dated 20th December, 2005 passed by 6th Additional District Judge -cum -Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Muzaffarpur, M.V. Claim Case No. 146/2003.

(2.) IT is undisputed that respondent No. 1 brought the case before the Claims Tribunal for being compensated to the loss suffered by him in accident, wherein he had to lose his leg and capability to continue in his employment as a driver. The Court below on basis of salary structure of the applicant arrived at the conclusion that he was entitled for sum of Rs. 8,17,993 which arrived after deduction of 35% from total income payable after use of multiplier 13 in his yearly income.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the claimant -respondent by placing reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Indira Shrivastav and Ors., I (2008) SLT 73=1 (2008) ACC 162 (SC)=I (2008) CPJ 24 (SC)=2008 (2) S.C.C. 763; K. Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others, V (2008) SLT 409=IV (2008) ACC 734 (SC) =2008 (8) S.C.C. 518; Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Prasad Verma, I (2009) SLT 658=1 (2009) ACC 357 (SC)=2009 (2) S.C.C. 712; Sarlaf Verma (Smt.) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, VI (2009) SLT 663=162 (2009) DLT 278 (SC)=III (2009) ACC 708 (SC) =2009 (6) S.C.C. 121; submitted that the claimant was entitled for full compensation without any deduction and no deductions from his monthly income has contended on behalf of the appellant was required under law.