DINESH KUMAR GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

          FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1305 of 2007

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and another
                                                            .....Appellant(s)

                                  Versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and another
                                                          .....Respondent(s)


Along with :
1. First Appeal From Order No. 1575 of 2005:
   United India Insurance Company Ltd. Thru Divisional Manager
                                 Versus
   Dinesh Kumar Gupta and others

Counsel for Appellant(s)       : Sharve Singh, Neerja Singh, Rahul
                                 Mishra, Saral Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)      : Arun Kumar, Neerja Singh, Rahul
                                 Mishra, Sharve Singh

Court No. - 54
                     HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.

1. Heard Sri Sharve Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Smt.
Neerja Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri Rahul Mishra,
learned counsel for the respondent.

2. These two First Appeals From Order have been filed against the
judgment dated 15.3.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District Deoria, in M.A.C.
No. 75 of 2002.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Km. Nandini, aged
about two years, was knocked down by Jeep No. UP-57/1127 on 9.10.2000
at about 9:00 A.M. on National Highway No. 28, near Village Farmauli,
Police Station Hata, District Deoria. He further submitted that the learned
Tribunal, considering the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per
annum, has awarded a meagre amount of compensation of Rs.2,25,000/-.

4. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kusmi Devi
Vs. Md. Kasim and another, 2023 (3) T.A.C. 17 (S.C.), it was submitted
that in the said case, where a minor child aged about three years succumbed
to her injuries, the Hon'ble Supreme Court enhanced the compensation to
                                                         FAFO No. 1305 of 2007
                                2

Rs.6,00,000/-. Similarly, the Coordinate Bench of this Court, in Brahma
Dev Singh Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited and others, 2020
ACJ 1096, awarded compensation of Rs.6,60,000/- in the case of death of a
minor girl aged about six years. Therefore, it was submitted that the
compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal deserves to be modified and
enhanced.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company
submitted that the award has been passed in accordance with the guidelines
contained in the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles
Act. Hence, no interference is warranted with the award passed by the
learned Tribunal.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. It is apparent from the record that the appellants/claimants themselves, in
their claim petition, had assessed the income of the deceased minor by
taking her notional income at Rs.15,000/- per annum. Therefore, the
contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant, which is contrary to
the pleadings contained in the claim petition, is not sustainable.

8. Accordingly, the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal is
upheld. Consequently, First Appeal From Order No. 1305 of 2007 is
dismissed.

9. In the connected First Appeal From Order No.1575 of 2005, learned
counsel for the appellant submitted that the driving licence of the driver of
the offending vehicle, i.e., Jeep No. UP-57/1127, was not produced before
the learned Tribunal. Hence, the finding of the learned Tribunal fastening the
entire liability upon the Insurance Company, without granting it the right to
recover the amount of compensation from the owner of the offending
vehicle, is unsustainable.

10. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pappu and Others Vs. Vinod
Kumar Lamba and another, (2018) 3 Supreme Court Cases 208. Learned
counsel further submitted that the right of recovery has not been granted to
the Insurance Company despite the fact that the driver had no valid driving
licence at the time of the accident.

11. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the Insurance
Company is entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the owner
of the offending vehicle.
                                                                                            FAFO No. 1305 of 2007
                                                                   3

                                    12. Accordingly, the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal is
                                    modified to the extent that the Insurance Company shall first satisfy the
                                    award of compensation in favour of the claimants and shall thereafter be
                                    entitled to recover the said amount from the owner of the offending vehicle.

                                    13. The First Appeal From Order No. 1575 of 2005 is, accordingly, partly
                                    allowed.

                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Mukesh
                                                                                            (Anil Kumar-X,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
MUKESH SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad