Title: IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD v. KETAN HARISHCHANDRA MHATRE & ORS.
Decided on: 2nd AUGUST, 2023
FIRST APPEAL NO.1084 OF 2017
CORAM: ABHAY AHUJA, J.
Facts of the Case
Tanaji Bhoir was involved in a bike accident in 2009 and he later died while undergoing treatment for the same. His family had filed a Claim before the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal for compensation of Rs. 1.25 Crores under Sec. 166 of MV Act, 1988. The Tribunal granted for a compensation of 56,38, 374 with a 7% interest p.a. Aggrieved by this, the appellant insurance Co. filed before the HC.
Issues
(a) Whether trial Court was correct in considering income from transport business when there are no pleadings to that effect?
(b) Whether the trial Court was correct in discarding a clear admission in the cross examination that on the date of accident, the deceased was not employed and already resigned from his previous job?
Contentions
The Appellant contended that the trial Court was wrong in considering these facts for deciding the claim amount. The widow of the wife had clearly said that his only source of income was from service which was 37,750 and nothing was mentioned about his transport business. The deceased had, in fact, resigned from his Job one month before the accident; so, his salary from his previous job should not be considered to decide the claim amount. The average income of past 3 years should have been considered to decide the compensation.
The defendants contended that the income on the date of death should be considered, not any past years’ average. The deceased was working in Reliance Industries and also had his own transport business. In order to give time to his business, he quit his job. The Income Tax Returns filed include income from both job and business. Even as per MCAT, the year of highest income is considered for compensation.
Decision
The Court accepted the view of the respondents that a claim application before MCAT is not a plaint governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, nor is it a Civil Suit but it is a special proceeding under the Special Act, i.e., the MV Act, 1988.
The evidence of previous year income is fully valid and compensation is rightly based on previous year’s income.
Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aparna Gupta, University Law College & Dept. of Studies in Law
