Sandhya Rani Jana And Anr Vs ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. And Another. (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court considered an appeal filed by the parents of a deceased victim who had died in a motor accident, challenging the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The claim arose from an accident that occurred on 23 December 2014, when the deceased, while standing on a footpath after work, was hit by a motorcycle driven rashly and negligently, resulting in his death at the spot. A criminal case under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the rider of the offending vehicle.
The deceased was a goldsmith by profession and the sole earning member of the family. His parents, the claimants, asserted that he earned ₹30,000 per month and were entirely dependent on his income. The Tribunal, however, assessed the monthly income of the deceased at ₹10,000 and awarded compensation of ₹15,05,000 with interest at 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the assessment of income and quantum of compensation, the claimants preferred an appeal.
The principal grievance before the High Court was that the Tribunal failed to consider three consecutive years of income tax returns filed during the lifetime of the deceased and wrongly insisted on production of bank passbooks despite examination of an Income Tax Officer. The appellants contended that the income tax return for Assessment Year 2014–2015 disclosed an annual income of ₹3,18,470 and should have been accepted as the basis for computing compensation. The insurance company supported the Tribunal’s reasoning, contending that insistence on bank passbooks was justified.
