Ved Prakash Goel @ Ved Goel & anr. v. S.D. Singh & anr. (SC)
2020(1) L.A.R. 650 = (2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15192
From the Database of www.lawtodaylive.com
Supreme Court of India
Before: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rastogi & Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Civil Appeal No.2831 of 2020
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.13992 of 2018)

Decided on: 29.07.2020
Ved Prakash Goel @ Ved Goel & anr. - Appellants
Versus
S.D. Singh & anr. - Respondents

For Appellant(s):

Mr. Anant Agarwal, Adv. and Ms. Sweta Rani, AOR

For Respondent(s):

Mr. Akshay Girish Ringe, AOR, Ms. Megha Mukerjee, Adv., Mr. Parmanand Gaur, AOR and Mr. Ekansh Bansal, Adv.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Rate of interest on award – Court find infirmity in impugned judgment, where interest granted is of 6% which generally the interest being granted is of 9% -- Impugned judgment held liable to be modified – Appeal allowed accordingly.

(Para 5-7)

Cases referred:

1. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. - (2009) 6 SCC 121 = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 12247 = 2009 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 1.

2. Erudhaya Priya v. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd., Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15163.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The manner in which incident occurred shows that the deceased actually came on the wrong side of the single way as the other side of the way was closed. It is this, which has weighed in affixing 50% contributory negligence on the appellants.

4. In view of the aforesaid, we are not able to persuade ourselves to give the benefit of the entire compensation to the appellants.

5. We have examined the impugned judgment and all other perspective also and do not find any infirmity except two aspects: (a) the multiplier applied was 13 while as per the judgment in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. - (2009) 6 SCC 121 = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 12247 = 2009 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 1, it should have been 18. This position cannot be disputed by learned counsel for the respondent. (b) The interest granted is of 6% which generally the interest being granted is of 9% including in a recent judgment in the case of Erudhaya Priya v. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. [Civil Appeal Nos. 2811-2812/2020) decided on 27th July, 2020 = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15163.

6. The aforesaid are the only two aspects on which the impugned judgment is liable to be modified and all other findings are liable to be sustained.

7. The appeal is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Appeal allowed.

********

www.lawtodaylive.com
Ved Prakash Goel @ Ved Goel & anr. v. S.D. Singh & anr. (SC)
2020 (1) L.A.R. 650 = (2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15192
From the Database of www.lawtodaylive.com
Supreme Court of India
Before: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rastogi & Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Civil Appeal No.2831 of 2020
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.13992 of 2018)

Decided on: 29.07.2020
Ved Prakash Goel @ Ved Goel & anr. - Appellants
Versus
S.D. Singh & anr. - Respondents

For Appellant(s):

Mr. Anant Agarwal, Adv. and Ms. Sweta Rani, AOR

For Respondent(s):

Mr. Akshay Girish Ringe, AOR, Ms. Megha Mukerjee, Adv., Mr. Parmanand Gaur, AOR and Mr. Ekansh Bansal, Adv.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Rate of interest on award – Court find infirmity in impugned judgment, where interest granted is of 6% which generally the interest being granted is of 9% -- Impugned judgment held liable to be modified – Appeal allowed accordingly.

(Para 5-7)

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The manner in which incident occurred shows that the deceased actually came on the wrong side of the single way as the other side of the way was closed. It is this, which has weighed in affixing 50% contributory negligence on the appellants.

4. In view of the aforesaid, we are not able to persuade ourselves to give the benefit of the entire compensation to the appellants.

5. We have examined the impugned judgment and all other perspective also and do not find any infirmity except two aspects: (a) the multiplier applied was 13 while as per the judgment in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. - (2009) 6 SCC 121 = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 12247 = 2009 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 1, it should have been 18. This position cannot be disputed by learned counsel for the respondent. (b) The interest granted is of 6% which generally the interest being granted is of 9% including in a recent judgment in the case of Erudhaya Priya v. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. [Civil Appeal Nos. 2811-2812/2020) decided on 27th July, 2020 = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15163.

6. The aforesaid are the only two aspects on which the impugned judgment is liable to be modified and all other findings are liable to be sustained.

7. The appeal is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Appeal allowed.

********

www.lawtodaylive.com