National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Rani Devi and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1132937
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMar-05-2014
AppellantNational Insurance Company Ltd.
RespondentSmt. Rani Devi and Others
Excerpt:
archana arora fao no.1281 of 2014 1 2014.03.12 14:22 i am the author of this document in the high court of punjab & haryana, chandigarh fao no.1281 of 2014 date of decision march 5, 2014 national insurance company ltd. ....... appellant versus smt. rani devi and others ........ respondents coram: hon'ble mr. justice k. kannan present:- mr. r. c. gupta, advocate for the appellant. **** 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.2. to be referred to the reporters or not?.3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. k. kannan, j (oral).1. the appeal by the insurance company is on two grounds; i) the fir which had been lodged gave the registration number of the vehicle differently but the driver that was challaned was of a different vehicle and (ii) the number had also been subsequently corrected in the petition. i will not take this discrepancy of any consequence especially when the driver and the owner did not take the witness stand to deny the involvement of the vehicle although a statement appears to have filed denying the accident. when the collusion is not brought out and proved by the insurer, the non-examination of the driver was material and the tribunal was entitled to draw an adverse inference by the non-examination of the driver of the vehicle which was said to have been involved in the fao no.1281 of 2014 2 accident.2. even as regards the quantum i would find the objection taken by the insurer that the income has been assessed on a higher side to be not justified at all. the deceased was admittedly an income tax assessee and for the assessment year 2011-12 he had been assessed to income at `1,58,400/-. it was in evidence that after the death of the deceased his son was running the shop which was established at the bus stand. the counsel argues that if at all there was a loss of managerial capacity of the deceased, it could not have been taken as `1,58,000/- per annum. it must be noticed that the tribunal was not taking the entire amount as represented as income earned for the assessment year 2011-12 as earned by the deceased. the deceased was 43 years of age and ought to have been at the peak of his life with two children of 19 and 15 years. it will be too harsh to expect that a young son of 19 years could surely replace his father and over a period of time there ought to have increase in income from the business. if the bread winner of the family dies and if a junior member steps into the shoes to run the business, it is not at all times an easy job. the family cannot be expected to live in penury and if there was a honest evidence in court that the son was running the business of what his father left behind, it still ought not be taken that there had been no loss to the family. `1,58,000/- stood just over `10,000/- per month which, in my view, is very modest in these days of high cost of living. that ought to be taken as the loss of managerial skills of the father and the assessment done by the tribunal was just and no interference is fao no.1281 of 2014 3 called for.3. the award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (k. kannan) judge march 5, 2014 archana
Judgment:

Archana arora FAO No.1281 of 2014 1 2014.03.12 14:22 I am the author of this document IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No.1281 of 2014 Date of decision March 5, 2014 National Insurance Company Ltd. ....... Appellant Versus Smt. Rani Devi and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. R. C. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?.

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The appeal by the Insurance Company is on two grounds; i) the FIR which had been lodged gave the registration number of the vehicle differently but the driver that was challaned was of a different vehicle and (ii) the number had also been subsequently corrected in the petition. I will not take this discrepancy of any consequence especially when the driver and the owner did not take the witness stand to deny the involvement of the vehicle although a statement appears to have filed denying the accident. When the collusion is not brought out and proved by the insurer, the non-examination of the driver was material and the tribunal was entitled to draw an adverse inference by the non-examination of the driver of the vehicle which was said to have been involved in the FAO No.1281 of 2014 2 accident.

2. Even as regards the quantum I would find the objection taken by the insurer that the income has been assessed on a higher side to be not justified at all. The deceased was admittedly an income tax assessee and for the assessment year 2011-12 he had been assessed to income at `1,58,400/-. It was in evidence that after the death of the deceased his son was running the shop which was established at the bus stand. The counsel argues that if at all there was a loss of managerial capacity of the deceased, it could not have been taken as `1,58,000/- per annum. It must be noticed that the tribunal was not taking the entire amount as represented as income earned for the assessment year 2011-12 as earned by the deceased. The deceased was 43 years of age and ought to have been at the peak of his life with two children of 19 and 15 years. It will be too harsh to expect that a young son of 19 years could surely replace his father and over a period of time there ought to have increase in income from the business. If the bread winner of the family dies and if a junior member steps into the shoes to run the business, it is not at all times an easy job. The family cannot be expected to live in penury and if there was a honest evidence in court that the son was running the business of what his father left behind, it still ought not be taken that there had been no loss to the family. `1,58,000/- stood just over `10,000/- per month which, in my view, is very modest in these days of high cost of living. That ought to be taken as the loss of managerial skills of the father and the assessment done by the tribunal was just and no interference is FAO No.1281 of 2014 3 called for.

3. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 5, 2014 archana