LAWS(JHAR)-2023-2-107

SILWANTI SAMAD Vs. MAHAVIR KUMAR MANTRI

Decided On February 17, 2023
Silwanti Samad Appellant
V/S
Mahavir Kumar Mantri Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Zaid Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. G.C. Jha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/ The Oriental Insurance Company Limited. Although the notice was issued upon the respondent No.1, who is the owner of the vehicle and who has been served but inspite of that, respondent No.1 has not appeared and that is why the instant appeal has been heard in absence of the respondent no.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment/ Award dtd. 15/10/2015, passed by the learned Principal District Judge-cum- Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Simdega in M.A.C.C. Case No.25 of 2014, the claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the awarded amount.

(2.) The claim application was filed stating therein that on 20/12/2010 the deceased along with Binay Surin was going to Simdega on Hero Honda Motorcycle No.JHO 20A/1230 and at about 1:00 p.m. near Fikpani Mantri Bus bearing registration No.JHO1B-1585 was coming from Rourkela side and dashed the motorcycle of the deceased due to which he received fatal injury and died at the spot and with respect to that accident, Kolebira P.S.Case No.51/10 was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the driver of the offending vehicle under the relevant Sec. of the I.P.C. Mr. Zaid Ahmad, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/claimant submits that the learned Tribunal has erred in not providing any amount under the future prospect head. He further submits that the age of the deceased was 25 years and in view of the judgment rendered in the case of "National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi", (2017) 16 SCC 680 it was required to be multiplied by 18, whereas it was multiplied by 17. He further submits that the income was considered on the lessor side and on this ground, he submits that interference is required by this Court.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. G.C.Jha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/Insurance Company submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly calculated the amount and the quantum is in accordance with law and there is no illegality in the award and this petition may kindly be dismissed.